Psychedelic Strawmen: A Call for Greater Transparency of PTSD Treatment Efficacy in Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy Research

Reporting errors in psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT) research can create inaccurate comparisons with existing PTSD treatments, contributing to public hype. This article identifies specific types of reporting errors from recent peer-reviewed literature and offers recommendations for researchers to improve accuracy and rigor, as well as for clinicians and peer reviewers to critically evaluate the evidence.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Abstract Psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT) is a novel and promising form of treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, clinicians may experience challenges in interpreting the existing evidence for PAT to make informed decisions about treatment recommendations and selection with their patients. Prior commentators have noted the hype surrounding public discussions of PAT. This hype may stem, at least in part, from how some peer-reviewed articles have reported and contextualized their findings. Researchers and disseminators of novel treatments have a responsibility to clinicians and the public alike to accurately represent the current evidence for existing treatments when presenting their findings. This article identifies types of reporting errors in PAT research that foster inaccurate comparisons with existing PTSD therapies, and it provides specific examples of each error from the recent peer-reviewed literature. We offer recommendations for researchers to improve the accuracy and rigor of their reporting, and for clinicians and peer reviewers to engage more critically with the research to identify sources of potential hype.