ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology reports2024
Development of the Japanese version of the 30-item Mystical Experience Questionnaire.
Article in Neuropsychopharmacology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Methodological fragmentation and integration priorities in psychedelic-assisted therapy assessment: a scoping review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Development of Japanese Versions of the 4-Item Mystical Experience Questionnaire and 7-Item Challenging Experience Questionnaire.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2026Article
- Development of the Japanese version of the Challenging Experience Questionnaire.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2024Article
- Development of the Japanese version of the 30-item Mystical Experience Questionnaire.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2024Article
- Development of the Japanese version of the Ego-Dissolution Inventory (EDI).Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 2024Article
- Development of a mandarin version of the five dimensional altered states of consciousness (5D-ASC) rating scale.Drug science, policy and lawArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPsychedelics have garnered increased attention as potential therapeutic options for various mental illnesses. Previous studies reported that psychedelics cause psychoactive effects through mystical experiences induced by these substances, including an altered state of consciousness. While this phenomenon is commonly assessed by the Mystical Experiences Questionnaire (MEQ30), a Japanese version of the MEQ30 has not been available. The aim of this study was to develop the Japanese version of the MEQ30.
methodsWe adhered to the "Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: Report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation" in our translation process. Two Japanese psychiatrists independently performed forward translations, from which a unified version was derived through reconciliation. This version was subsequently back-translated into English and reviewed by the original authors for equivalency. The iterative revision process was carried out through ongoing discussions with the original authors until they approved the final back-translated version.
resultsThe final, approved back-translated version of the MEQ30 is presented in the accompanying figure. Additionally, the authorized Japanese version of the MEQ30 is included in the Appendix A.
conclusionsIn this study, we successfully developed a Japanese version of the MEQ30. This scale will facilitate the assessment of mystical experiences associated with psychedelic-assisted therapy among Japanese speakers. Further research is warranted to evaluate the reliability and validity of this newly translated scale.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.