Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41099474›Full record

ReviewJournal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England)2026

Mind the gap! Addressing unresolved aspects of abuse potential evaluation and scheduling of classic and novel psychedelic drugs.

David J Heal, Jane Gosden, Sharon L Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

David J HealDepartment of Life Sciences, University of Bath, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6128-9632
Jane GosdenDevelRx Ltd, BioCity, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0009-0003-6169-0746
Sharon L SmithDevelRx Ltd, BioCity, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4801-8475

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychedelic research is progressing at breakneck speed and is creating new challenges for drug developers, regulatory authorities, and legislators. Most "classic" psychedelics undergoing clinical investigation are C-I controlled drugs with perceived high potential for abuse and no medical use. These and next-generation psychedelic drug-candidates require scientific and clinical assessment of their abuse and dependence potential before transitioning into a controlled drug schedule assigned to clinically approved drugs (C-II to C-V). Food and Drug Administration is likely to undertake the first regulatory assessment of a "classic" psychedelic, and it has led in disseminating advice on how to address the clinical and regulatory challenges. We have built on this foundation by discussing areas of abuse and dependence evaluation procedures that remain unclear or have not previously been covered. Psychedelic drug-candidates can be classified into three categories, that is, "classic" (well-known compounds including psilocybin,

Indexed as

HallucinogensSubstance-Related DisordersAnimalsHumansUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationHallucinogensabuse potentialcontrolled drug schedulingControlled Substances Actpsychedelicssafety pharmacology

Identifiers

PMID41099474
PMCPMC13198625

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.