Digital Enablement of Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy in Non-Clinical Settings: A Systematic Review of Safety, Efficacy, and Implementation Models

Abstract

Psychedelic-assisted therapy offers rapid and profound benefits for treatment-resistant psychiatric conditions but remains constrained by the need for intensive, clinic-based administration. Concurrently, advances in digital health technologies have introduced scalable tools. This systematic review evaluates the safety, efficacy, and implementation of digitally enabled psychedelic-assisted therapy delivered in non-clinical settings. A comprehensive search of five databases, registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251020968) and conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, identified six eligible studies including real-world analyses, clinical trials, qualitative research, and case reports, representing a total of 12,731 participants. Most studies examined at-home ketamine or esketamine therapy supported by telehealth platforms or mobile applications. Data were synthesized narratively given the heterogeneity of designs and outcomes. Digital enablement was associated with high response rates (ranging from 56.4% to 62.8% for depression) and rapid symptom improvement, particularly in depression and anxiety. Remote monitoring and digital tools demonstrated feasibility and acceptability, but serious safety concerns—including psychiatric adverse events and one unintentional overdose—underscore the need for strict oversight. Risk of bias was moderate to serious across non-randomized studies, limiting confidence in the findings. One study on virtual ayahuasca rituals highlighted the sociocultural potential and limitations of online practices. Despite promising preliminary findings, the field is marked by low methodological rigor and absence of controlled trials. Digitally supported at-home psychedelic therapy represents a transformative but high-stakes frontier, requiring robust research and safeguards to ensure safe, equitable, and effective implementation. No funding was received for this review, and the authors declare no conflicts of interest.