A Framework for Assessment of Adverse Events Occurring in Psychedelic Assisted Therapies

A multidisciplinary working group identified 53 potential adverse events (AEs) specific to psychedelic-assisted therapies (PATs) that current assessment tools miss. Existing measures cover only a fraction of these constructs. The group recommends new assessment methods—including patient, clinician, and informant reports—and specifies when to measure AEs across preparation, dosing, integration, and follow-up phases. The framework addresses gaps in capturing post-acute dosing effects, including changes in worldview and spirituality, which distinguish PAT from other treatments.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Objective: Despite considerable research examining the efficacy of psychedelic-assisted therapies (PATs) for treating psychiatric disorders, assessment of adverse events (AEs) in PAT research has lagged. Current AE reporting standards in PAT trials are poorly calibrated to features of PAT that distinguish it from other treatments, leaving many potential AEs unassessed.Methods: A multidisciplinary working group of experts involved in PAT pooled formally and informally documented AEs observed through research experience and in published literature. This information was integrated with (a) current standards and practices for AE reporting in pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy trials, and (b) published findings documenting post-acute dosing impacts of psychedelics on subjective states, meaning, and psychosocial health variables, to produce a set of AE constructs important to evaluate in PAT as well as recommended methods and time frames for their assessment and monitoring. Correspondence between identified potential AEs and current standards for AE assessment was examined, including the extent of coverage of identified AE constructs by 22 existing measures used in relevant research. Results: 53 potential AE terms warranting systematized assessment in PAT were identified, defined, and categorized. Existing measures demonstrated substantial gaps in their coverage of identified AE constructs. Recommendations were developed for how to assess PAT AEs (including patient, clinician, and informant reports), and when to assess over preparation, dosing session, integration, and follow-up. Conclusions: This assessment framework addresses the need to capture post-acute dosing AEs in PAT, accounting for its pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy components, as well as documented impacts of psychedelics on worldviews and spirituality.