Cited by 162Psychedelics and Drug StudiesReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyPalliative and Oncologic Care

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 105 of the 105 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 46 of the 138 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Psychedelics for the treatment of depression, anxiety, and existential distress in patients with a terminal illness: a systematic review

Open access

Abstract

Background: Terminally ill patients may experience existential distress, depression, or anxiety, limiting quality of life in the final stage. Existing psychotherapeutic or pharmacological interventions have (time) limited efficacy. Psychedelic treatment may be a safe and effective alternative treatment option. Aim: Systematically review studies on psychedelic treatment with and without psychotherapy for existential distress, depression, and anxiety in terminally ill patients. Methods: Medline, PsycINFO, and Embase were searched for original-data studies on the treatment of depression, anxiety, and existential distress with classical or a-typical psychedelics in patients with a terminal illness, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results: A total of 1850 records were screened, and 33 articles were included in this review: 14 studies on classical psychedelics (DPT, LSD, and psilocybin) and 19 studies on atypical psychedelics (MDMA and ketamine). Results of early pre-post studies are promising but have serious methodological flaws. Recent (controlled) trials with LSD, psilocybin, ketamine, and MDMA are of higher methodological quality and indicate positive effects on existential and spiritual well-being, quality of life, acceptance, and reduction of anxiety and depression with few adverse and no serious adverse effects. Conclusions: Both classical and a-typical psychedelics are promising treatment options in patients with terminal illness. To draw final conclusions on effectiveness and safety of psychedelics, we need larger high-quality studies for classical psychedelics and MDMA. Ketamine studies should pay more attention to existential dimensions of well-being and the psychotherapeutic context of the treatment. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00213-021-06027-y

Cites

105 of 105 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

50 No full text of the sources · 21 Supported · 16 Partly supported · 14 Sources not found · 14 Own result · 11 No basis given · 9 Not checked yet · 6 Own interpretation · 5 Supported so far · 4 Own method · 1 Not supported · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 75 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 19
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 58
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
76 of 76
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    No existing review simultaneously covers classical and atypical psychedelic treatments for end-of-life patients.

    “To our knowledge, there is currently no review of psychedelic treatments for end-of-life patients that simultaneously assesses classical and atypical psychedelics.”
1 of 1

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

12 of 12

Cited works that were retracted

Works this paper cites that were later retracted, from the retraction notices publishers deposit. Major when the notice came out before this paper was published.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 104 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kurland AA, Grof S, Pahnke WN et al (1972) Psychedelic drug assisted psychotherapy in patients with terminal cancer. J Thanatology 2(1–2):644–691

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–161 of 161

Metadata

Authors
Schimmers, N., Breeksema, J. J., Smith-Apeldoorn, S. Y., Veraart, J., van den Brink, W., & Schoevers, R. A.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
Corresponding author
Schimmers, Nina
Venue
Psychopharmacology
Published
2021-11-23
Volume
239
Issue
1
Pages
15-33
ISSN
  • 0033-3158 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2072
OpenAlex
W3216164364
Cited by
162
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 17
FWCI
3.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychedelics and Drug Studies
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
psychedelics, terminal illness, depression, anxiety, existential suffering, psilocybin, LSD, MDMA, ketamine, classical psychedelics, psychotherapy, quality of life, spiritual well-being, acceptance, adverse effects
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Depression, Hallucinogens, Humans, Psilocybin, Quality of Life

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review