Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36063208›Full record

ArticlePsychopharmacology2022

Expectancy in placebo-controlled trials of psychedelics: if so, so what?

Matt Butler, Luke Jelen, James Rucker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychopharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Ketamine-induced analgesia and dissociation show distinct behavioral and neural correlates.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Ten practical suggestions for setting up a psychedelic study.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Causal Inference in Studies with Functional Unmasking: Psychedelics and Beyond.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Matt ButlerInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. matthew.butler@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9734-6539
Luke JelenInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
James RuckerInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/T028084/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern psychedelic research remains in an early phase, and the eventual introduction of psychedelics into clinical practice remains in doubt. In this piece, we discuss the role of blinding and expectancy in psychedelic trials, and place this in a broader historical and contemporary context of blinding in trials across the rest of healthcare. We suggest that premature and uncritical promotion ('hype') of psychedelics as medicines is not only misleading, but also directly influences participant expectancy in ongoing psychedelic trials. We argue that although psychedelic trials are likely to significantly overestimate treatment effects by design due to unblinding and expectancy effects, this is not a unique situation. Placebo-controlled RCTs are not a perfect fit for all therapeutics, and problems in blinding should not automatically disqualify medications from licencing decisions. We suggest that simple practical measures may be (and indeed already are) taken in psychedelic trials to partially mitigate the effects of expectancy and unblinding, such as independent raters and active placebos. We briefly suggest other alternative trial methodologies which could be used to bolster RCT results, such as naturalistic studies. We conclude that the results of contemporary placebo-controlled RCTs of psychedelics should neither be dismissed due to imperfections in design, nor should early data be taken as firm evidence of effectiveness.

Indexed as

HallucinogensEmotionsHumansPsilocybinRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHallucinogensPsilocybinClinical trialsExpectancyPlaceboPsilocybinPsychoactive medication

Identifiers

PMID36063208
PMCPMC9481484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.