ArticleBMJ open2024
UK medical students' self-reported knowledge and harm assessment of psychedelics and their application in clinical research: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychoactive Substance Use and Its Association with Mental Health Symptomatology Among Latvian Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Examining the influence of team-based learning on medical students' comprehension and attitudes regarding psychedelic therapies.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2024Article
- Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on Psychedelic-Assisted Therapies Across Clinical Contexts: "I Can Offer Medical Assistance in Dying, but I Can't Prescribe Psychedelics".Global advances in integrative medicine and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo capture UK medical students' self-reported knowledge and harm assessment of psychedelics and to explore the factors associated with support for changing the legal status of psychedelics to facilitate further clinical research.
designCross-sectional, anonymous online survey of UK medical students using a non-random sampling method.
settingUK medical schools recognised by the General Medical Council.
participants132 medical students who had spent an average of 3.8 years (SD=1.4; range: 1-6) in medical school.
resultsMost students (83%) reported that they were aware of psychedelic research and only four participants (3%) said that they were not interested in learning more about this type of research. Although medical students' harm assessment of psychedelics closely aligned with that of experts, only 17% of students felt well-educated on psychedelic research. Teachings on psychedelics were only rarely encountered in their curriculum (psilocybin: 14.1 (SD=19.9), scale: 0 (never) to 100 (very often)). Time spent at medical schools was not associated with more knowledge about psychedelics (r=0.12, p=0.129). On average, this sample of medical students showed strong support for changing the legal status of psychedelics to facilitate further research into their potential clinical applications (psilocybin: 80.2 (SD=24.8), scale: 0 (strongly oppose) to 100 (strongly support)). Regression modelling indicated that greater knowledge of psychedelics (p<0.001), lower estimated harm scores (p<0.001), more time spent in medical school (p=0.024) and lower perceived effectiveness of non-pharmacological mental health treatments (p=0.044) were associated with greater support for legal status change.
conclusionsOur findings reveal a significant interest among UK medical students to learn more about psychedelic research and a strong support for further psychedelic research. Future studies are needed to examine how medical education could be refined to adequately prepare medical students for a changing healthcare landscape in which psychedelic-assisted therapy could soon be implemented in clinical practice.
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.