Review of Reporting Practices in Psychedelic Clinical Trials
Author Information
Author(s): William Brennan, Alex R. Kelman, Alexander B. Belser
Primary Institution: Consultants, New York, NY, USA; Cybin, Inc., Toronto, Canada; UCLA Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, Los Angeles, CA, USA; UCLA Department of Psychology, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Hypothesis
The study aims to identify deficiencies in the reporting practices of psychosocial interventions in psychedelic clinical trials.
Conclusion
The review highlights significant underreporting of key aspects of psychosocial interventions in psychedelic clinical trials, which hampers research reproducibility and treatment efficacy assessment.
Supporting Evidence
- 33% of trials did not report the number of sessions.
- 45% did not report the duration of sessions.
- 42% did not report provider credentials.
- 52% did not report whether their intervention used a therapy manual.
- 64% did not reference a manual that was available to readers.
- 82% did not report that they assessed treatment fidelity.
Takeaway
This study looked at how well researchers report the support given to patients during psychedelic therapy, finding that many important details are often missing.
Methodology
The review systematically searched PubMed/Medline and PSYCinfo databases for clinical trials involving classic psychedelics or empathogenic drugs published since 2000, focusing on the reporting of psychosocial interventions.
Potential Biases
The data extraction was performed by a single author, which may introduce subjectivity and potential errors.
Limitations
The review may have language bias as it only included English-language studies and may have overlooked relevant publications in other languages.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website