PreprintCited by 15Psychedelics and Drug StudiesPain Management and Placebo EffectStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Blinding and expectancy confounds in psychedelic randomised controlled trials

Open access
Muthukumaraswamy, Suresh, Forsyth, Anna, Lumley, Thomas·2021

Abstract

There is increasing interest in the potential for psychedelic drugs such as psilocybin, LSD and ketamine to treat a number of mental health disorders. To gain evidence for the therapeutic effectiveness of psychedelics, a number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted using the traditional RCT framework and these trials have generally shown promising results, with large effect sizes reported. However, in this paper we argue that estimation of treatment effect sizes in psychedelic clinical trials are likely over-estimated due to de-blinding of participants and high levels of response expectancy generated by RCT trial contingencies. The degree of over-estimation is at present difficult to estimate. We conduct systematic reviews of psychedelic RCTs and show that currently reported RCTs have failed to measure and report expectancy and malicious de-blinding. In order to overcome these confounds we argue that RCTs should routinely measure de-blinding and expectancy and that careful attention should be paid to the clinical trial design used and the instructions given to participants to allow these confounds to be estimated and removed from effect size estimates. We urge caution in interpreting effect size estimates from extant psychedelic RCTs.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.31234/osf.io/q2hzm

Cites

123 of 123 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Podolsky, S.H., D.S. Jones, and T.J. Kaptchuk, Chapter 3 -From Trials to Trials: Blinding, Medicine, and Honest Adjudication, in Blinding as a Solution to Bias, A.S. Kesselheim and C.T. Robertson, Editors. 2016, Academic Press: San Diego. p. 45-58.
  2. Hoffmann, A., LSD: My problem child. 2013: Oxford University Press.
  3. Hróbjartsson, A. and P.C. Gøtzsche, Is the Placebo Powerless? New England Journal of Medicine, 2001. 344(21): p. 1594-1602.
  4. ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline. Statistical principles for clinical trials. International Conference on Harmonisation E9 Expert Working Group. Stat Med, 1999. 18(15): p. 1905-42.
  5. Sumner, R., et al., Ketamine enhances visual sensory evoked potential LTP in patients with major depressive disorder. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging 2019. In press.
  6. Straus, S.E., et al., Evidence-Based Medicine E-Book : How to Practice and Teach EBM. 2018, Philadelphia, UNITED KINGDOM: Elsevier.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Muthukumaraswamy, S., Forsyth, A., & Lumley, T.
Affiliations
University of Auckland (NZ)
Published
2021-03-08
OpenAlex
W4231889404
Cited by
15
References
123
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychedelics and Drug Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
psychedelics, blinding, response expectancy, placebo effect, psilocybin, LSD, ketamine, trial design, clinical trial reporting

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