“A sense of the bigger picture:” A qualitative analysis of follow-up interviews with people with bipolar disorder who self-reported psilocybin use
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: People with bipolar disorder (BD) spend more time depressed than manic/hypomanic, and depression is associated with greater impairments in psychosocial functioning and quality of life than mania/hypomania. Emerging evidence suggests psilocybin, the psychoactive compound in “magic mushrooms,” is a promising treatment for unipolar depression. Clinical trials of psilocybin therapy have excluded people with BD as a precaution against possible adverse effects (e.g., mania). Our study centered the experiences of adults living with BD who consumed psilocybin-containing mushrooms, and aimed to (1) understand its subjective impacts on BD symptoms, (2) deepen understanding of Phase I survey results, and (3) elucidate specific contextual factors associated with adverse reactions in naturalistic settings. Methods: Following an international survey (Phase I), follow-up interviews were conducted with 15 respondents (Phase II) to further understand psilocybin use among adults with BD. As part of a larger mixed-methods explanatory sequential design study, reflexive thematic analysis was used to elaborate findings. Results: Three major themes containing sub-themes were developed. (1) Mental Health Improvements: (1.1) decreased impact and severity of depression, (1.2) increased emotion processing, (1.3) development of new perspectives, and (1.4) greater relaxation and sleep. (2) Undesired Mental Health Impacts: (2.1) changes in sleep, (2.2) increased mania severity, (2.3) hospitalization, and (2.4) distressing sensory experiences. (3) Salient Contextual Factors for psilocybin use included: (3.1) poly-substance use and psilocybin dose, (3.2) solo versus social experiences, and (3.3) pre-psilocybin sleep deprivation. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate both benefits and risks of psilocybin use in this population. Carefully designed clinical trials focused on safety and preliminary efficacy are warranted.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Two qualitative analyses of follow-up interviews and web-survey of anecdotal use of psilocybin in individuals with putative BD reported that the drug was perceived to be more helpful than harmful.
“Additionally, two qualitative analyses of follow-up interviews 88 and web-survey 89 of anecdotal use of psilocybin in individuals with putative BD reported that the drug was perceived to be more helpful than harmful.”
From The revival of psilocybin between scientific excitement, evidence of efficacy, and real-world challenges (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
The Introduction (Current study; page unavailable) says Phase I web-survey respondents typically reported psilocybin as more helpful than harmful. This citation is attached to the follow-up interviews, however, and the paper’s Discussion and Conclusion report both beneficial and undesired outcomes without establishing that interviewees perceived it as more helpful overall. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 90 · Cited by 28
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- [9]Rihmer Z. Prediction and prevention of suicide in bipolar disorders. Clin Neuropsychiatry. 2005; 2(1): 48– 54.
- [79]Dudysova DU, Koprivova J, Janku K, Smotek M, Saifutdinova E, Buskova J, et al. The effect of psilocybin on sleep. Journal of Sleep Research. 2020; 29: 57-.
- [88]Tedeschi RG, Calhoun LG. " Posttraumatic growth: conceptual foundations and empirical evidence". Psychological inquiry. 2004; 15(1): 1– 18.
- Authors
- DellaCrosse, M., Pleet, M., Morton, E., Ashtari, A., Sakai, K., Woolley, J., & Michalak, E.
- Affiliations
- San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Corresponding author
- DellaCrosse, Meghan
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2022-12-14
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- e0279073
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9749989
- OpenAlex
- W4311439362
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 90
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 4.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (vor)
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (IK4 CX002090)
- Lundbeckfonden
- H. Lundbeck A/S
- Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychedelics and Drug Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Keywords
- bipolar disorder, psilocybin, magic mushrooms, depression, mania, adverse effects, subjective experience, polydrug use, sleep deprivation, dosage, sensory experience, hospitalization, emotional processing, psychedelic therapy
- MeSH terms
- Mania, Adult, Bipolar Disorder, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Psilocybin, Quality of Life, Self Report
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.
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
