Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39627438›Full record

ReviewPsychopharmacology2025

Practical considerations in the establishment of psychedelic research programs.

Brian S Barnett, M Frances Vest, Marcus S Delatte, Franklin King Iv, Erin E Mauney, Anthony J Coulson, Sandeep M Nayak, Peter S Hendricks, George R Greer, Kevin S Murnane

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Psychopharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Ten practical suggestions for setting up a psychedelic study.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2026
    Article
  2. Trials, trips, and tribulations: pathways for implementing psychedelic therapy in Ireland.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors.

Brian S BarnettDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Lutheran Hospital, 1730 W 25th Street Floor 5E, Cleveland, OH, 44113, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8963-5701
M Frances VestDepartment of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Neuroscience, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, 71130, USA.
Marcus S DelatteRegulatory and Drug Development Consulting, Allucent, Cary, NC, 27513, USA.
Franklin King IvDepartment of Psychiatry, Center for Neuroscience of Psychedelics, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Erin E MauneyDivision of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, MassGeneral Hospital for Children, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Anthony J CoulsonNTH Consulting, Inc, Tucson, AZ, 85715, USA.
Sandeep M NayakCenter for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Peter S HendricksDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurobiology, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA.
George R GreerHeffter Research Institute, 15 E Putnam Ave, Ste 413, Greenwich, CT, 06830, USA.
Kevin S MurnaneDepartment of Pharmacology, Toxicology and Neuroscience, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, 71130, USA. kevin.murnane@lsuhs.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThere is increasing interest in establishing psychedelic research programs at academic medical centers. However, psychedelics are intensely psychoactive, carry considerable sociopolitical baggage, and most are Schedule I drugs, creating significant potential impediments to implementation. There is little formal guidance for investigators on navigating the complex on-the-ground obstacles associated with establishing psychedelic research programs.

objectivesThis article provides recommendations that may be helpful to investigators seeking to work with psychedelics, with a focus on academic medical centers in the United States.

methodsThe academic literature on relevant matters is reviewed, and the authors provide observations from their experiences either working for relevant regulatory agencies or conducting basic science studies, investigator-initiated trials, or industry sponsored trials with psychedelics.

resultsInvestigators planning to conduct psychedelic research should cultivate broad institutional support early. Challenges related to securing funding, obtaining approval for an Investigational New Drug application from the Food and Drug Administration, clinical grade drug sourcing, obtaining a Schedule I researcher registration from the Drug Enforcement Administration and an equivalent state license (if required), preparing spaces for treatment and study drug storage, managing controlled substance inventory, engaging the local community, and other issues should be anticipated.

conclusionsInvestigators should anticipate several implementation challenges when planning to work with psychedelics. However, these are likely surmountable with planning, persistence, and assistance from colleagues and other experts.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchHallucinogensAcademic Medical CentersHumansUnited StatesHallucinogensClinical researchClinical trialsLSDPsilocybinPsychedelics

Identifiers

PMID39627438
PMCPMC11742797

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.