ReviewBMC medical education2024
Expert recommendations for Germany's integration of psychedelic-assisted therapy.
Review in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trials, trips, and tribulations: pathways for implementing psychedelic therapy in Ireland.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
- Psilocybin in Neuropsychiatric Disorders: Seeking Valuable Evidence in History, Pure Science, Clinical Trials and Real-World Data (RWD).Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Review
- Ethical issues with psychedelic-assisted treatments in psychiatry: A systematic scoping review.Psychological medicine · 2025Article
- "Those pot heads" - perceived external stigma and self-stigma among cannabis users in Germany: prevalence and associations with socio-demographics, cannabis use patterns and psychological distress.Journal of cannabis research · 2025Article
- Psychedelic training program development: lessons from the evolution of the EMBARK program.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As clinical trials for psychedelics move into phase III in the USA, Europe must address its lag in integrating professional education around psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT) and supporting psychedelic drug research. This paper evaluates the necessary frameworks for implementing PAT in Germany, emphasizing the nation's potential leadership role within the European Union. With Australia having already approved MDMA and psilocybin for mental health indications, the Ukrainian government exploring MDMA treatment for war-related PTSD, and initial clinical trials involving MDMA and LSD with patients in Switzerland which restarted the restricted medical use of these substances around 2014, the medical authorization of psychedelics in these countries establishes precedent showcasing both the promise and challenges of researching and implementing PAT in nations where the substances were formally scheduled as illicit substances. Key challenges include establishing rigorous standards for practitioner training, accessibility, and defining regulatory oversight. This paper focuses on the development of robust infrastructure in Germany, which will support the roll out of PAT, and details ethical considerations, training protocols, and governmental roles in the formulation of treatment frameworks. This approach aims not only to guide Germany in adopting PAT but also to influence broader European policy, ensuring that patients receive ethically sound and proficient care. The findings suggest pathways for Europe to reclaim its historical lead in psychiatric and therapeutic innovation.
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.