ArticlePsychedelic medicine (New Rochelle, N.Y.)2025
Adverse Events Should Not Be Surprising in Psychedelic Research.
Article in Psychedelic medicine (New Rochelle, N.Y.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hallucinogen-Psychosis Associations Are Confounded by Baseline Psychiatric History.The Journal of clinical psychiatry · 2026Article
- Psychedelics as moral bioenhancers: Protocol for a scoping review of ethical arguments for and against.Wellcome open research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research has demonstrated both risks and benefits to using psychedelics as a therapeutic intervention for a variety of mental health conditions. In recent years, the public discourse around psychedelic treatments has been largely positive and focused on benefits more than risks. We believe the field would benefit from more balanced attention to the risks as well as benefits of psychedelics within the scientific community and broader public. Coverage of psychedelic science has swung between a pendulum of extremes, from fearmongering in past decades to effusive optimism today. Public discourse about the risks and benefits of psychedelics can and should instead be grounded in the growing evidence from clinical trials as well as participant reports. While most adverse events related to pyschedelics are mild, some have been severe and serious, and public education about the existence and nature of those risks is necessary. We predict that as more studies are conducted and eligibility criteria are relaxed to improve access, the incidence and severity of adverse events will increase. While no medical intervention is risk-free, it will be increasingly important to quantify and effectively communicate the risk/benefit profile of psychedelics.
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.