Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41244962›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in psychopharmacology2025

The ethical use of therapeutic touch in psychedelic-assisted therapy: a qualitative study of researcher perspectives and experiences.

Diana McHerron, Michaela Barber, Rachel Ham, Paul Liknaitzky, Adrian Carter, John Gardner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Diana McHerronSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Melbourne, VIC 3125, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1747-9521
Michaela BarberDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5114-6905
Rachel HamDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0744-6924
Paul LiknaitzkyDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5690-2263
Adrian CarterDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3593-0772
John GardnerMonash Bioethics Centre and School of Philosophical, Historical and Indigenous Studies, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7417-348X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Physical touch is often included as a supportive or therapeutic tool in psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT), involving instrumental forms of physical contact, supportive touch and somatic techniques. However, participants under the influence of psychedelics have reduced capacity to provide consent, are more suggestible and may experience and interpret therapeutic touch in ways they did not expect prior to taking the drug. Yet little research has been conducted on the considerations and approaches to therapeutic touch in clinical trials of PAT. Objectives: This study explored the experiences and perspectives of PAT researchers on the use and consent to therapeutic touch in clinical trials of PAT. Design: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Methods: Sixteen PAT researchers involved in clinical trials of PAT were interviewed. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. The reporting of this study conforms to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research Checklist (COREQ). Results: Three themes were uncovered through reflexive thematic analysis: (1) flexible frameworks, (2) therapeutic alliance and (3) boundary management. Researchers discussed consent challenges across the broad spectrum of physical contact existing in PAT protocols at the time. Researchers indicated that consent to therapeutic touch should be established prior to the dosing sessions and continually managed throughout the course of treatment. Flexibility in consent protocols enabled researchers to interpret and approach consent through the development of a strong therapeutic alliance; however, flexibility could also lead to challenges in boundary management. Researchers emphasised the need for greater ethical guidance in instances where trial participants change their established preferences during dosing sessions, and limits on expanding consent after drug administration. Conclusion: Clear guidelines for obtaining consent, managing changing preferences and training on the management of boundary transgressions were viewed as essential for ethical research and practice of PAT.

Indexed as

ethicsinformed consentMDMApsilocybinpsychedelic-assisted therapypsychedelicstherapeutic touch

Identifiers

PMID41244962
PMCPMC12618852

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.