The Psychedelic Frontier: A Cross-Specialty Review of Healthcare Providers' Attitudes on Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy in the US
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychedelics, historically used for transcendent experiences, have garnered renewed interest for their potential therapeutic applications, particularly in treating mental health conditions such as depression, PTSD, and addiction. Despite initial enthusiasm in the mid-20th century, the War on Drugs led to a decades-long hiatus in research. However, recent studies have demonstrated promising clinical outcomes, reigniting interest in integrating psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT) into modern medical practice. This review examines healthcare professionals’ attitudes toward psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT), exploring how these attitudes vary across specialties. A systematic literature review of 11 relevant articles, drawn from PubMed, Medline OVID, and EMBASE, assessed U.S. healthcare professionals' perceptions of PAT, focusing on attitudes, concerns, and factors influencing factors. Healthcare professionals expressed cautiously favorable attitudes toward PAT, supporting further research and education, while concerns centered on potential psychiatric and neurocognitive risks, addiction relapse, and a lack of trained providers. Concerns were primarily centered on psychiatric and neurocognitive risks, addiction relapse, and the shortage of trained providers. The review also highlighted the importance of increasing awareness, training, and education in psychedelic medicine, with guidelines from the American Psychedelic Practitioners Association (APPA) emphasizing licensure and continued professional development. Despite some limitations, including an overrepresentation of psychiatrists and psychologists in the literature, this review underscores the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and further research to facilitate PAT’s integration into clinical practice. ---------- Les psychédéliques, historiquement utilisés pour des expériences transcendantes, suscitent un regain d’intérêt en raison de leurs applications thérapeutiques potentielles, en particulier dans le traitement de troubles mentaux tels que la dépression, le syndrome de stress post-traumatique et la toxicomanie. Malgré l’enthousiasme initial au milieu du 20e siècle, la guerre contre la drogue a entraîné une interruption de plusieurs décennies dans la recherche. Cependant, des études récentes ont démontré des résultats cliniques prometteurs, ravivant l’intérêt pour l’intégration de la psychothérapie assistée par psychédéliques (PAP) dans la pratique médicale moderne. Cette revue examine les attitudes des professionnels de santé à l’égard de la PAP, en explorant comment ces attitudes varient selon les professions. Une revue systématique de la littérature portant sur 11 articles pertinents, tirés de PubMed, Medline OVID et EMBASE, a évalué la perception des professionnels de santé américains à l’égard de la PAP, en se concentrant sur leurs attitudes et leurs préoccupations. Les professionnels de santé ont exprimé des attitudes favorables mais prudentes à l’égard de la PAP, soutenant la poursuite de la recherche et de l’éducation, tout en exprimant des préoccupations centrées sur les risques psychiatriques et neurocognitifs potentiels, la rechute de la dépendance et le manque de prestataires formés. La revue a également souligné l’importance de sensibiliser, de former et d’éduquer davantage dans le domaine de la médecine psychédélique, avec des directives de l’American Psychedelic Practitioners Association (APPA) mettant l’accent sur l’octroi de licences et le développement professionnel continu. Malgré certaines limites, notamment une surreprésentation des psychiatres et des psychologues dans la littérature, cette revue souligne l’importance de la collaboration interdisciplinaire et de la poursuite des recherches pour faciliter l’intégration de la PAP dans la pratique clinique.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".