ArticleNeuroscience applied2024
Safety pharmacology of acute psilocybin administration in healthy participants.
Article in Neuroscience applied, 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.
- Dose-dependent pharmacokinetics and acute effects of intravenous bolus N,N-dimethyltryptamine: double-blind, randomized versus open-label dose-escalation administration study in healthy participants.Translational psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Acute Effects and Pharmacokinetics of LSD after Paroxetine or Placebo Pre-Administration in a Randomized, Double-Blind, Cross-Over Phase I Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Trial
- Cardiovascular safety of psilocybin in psychiatric practice: a narrative review.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Review
- Naturally Derived Psilocybin for Therapeutic Use: A Six-Criterion Framework for Evidence, Safety, and Benefit-Risk Considerations in Policy and Clinical Development.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Psilocybin and ayahuasca in treatment-resistant depression: clinical evidence, methodological constraints and ethical challenges: a narrative review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Implementing psychedelic-assisted therapy: History and characteristics of the Swiss limited medical use program.Neuroscience applied · 2025Review
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
Psilocybin is being studied for its therapeutic potential in various mental health disorders, such as depression, anxiety, and addiction. Initial studies suggested that psilocybin is generally safe when used under controlled conditions, but more research is needed to better understand its safety profile. We report safety pharmacology data from a pooled analysis of three randomized crossover studies that included 85 healthy participants and 113 single-dose administrations of psilocybin. Single oral doses included 15 mg, 20 mg, 25 mg, and 30 mg psilocybin dihydrate. We investigated subjective effects, blood pressure, heart rate, body temperature, acute and subacute adverse effects, reports of flashbacks, and liver and kidney function before and after the studies. The 20, 25, and 30 mg doses of psilocybin produced stronger effects than the 15 mg dose. Psilocybin at all doses induced higher "good drug effects" than "bad drug effects." Only the 25 and 30 mg doses increased anxiety. Psilocybin elevated autonomic effects only moderately. Tachycardia (>100 beats/min) was observed with 7% of all psilocybin administrations. Body temperature >38° was reached in 7%, 9%, 17%, and 32% of the participants with the 15, 20, 25, and 30 mg doses, respectively. Kidney and liver function parameters were unaltered at the end of the study. Five participants (6%) reported transient flashback phenomena. No serious adverse reactions occurred. These findings suggest that a single administration of psilocybin is safe with regard to acute psychological and physical harm in healthy participants in a controlled research setting.
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.