Enhanced independence: De-biasing processes in psychedelic research and beyond
Katherine Cheung, Rebecca Ehrenkranz, David B. Yaden
Research Ethics April 2, 2025 DOI: 10.1177/17470161251326588 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Review Randomized Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Biasing Independence probability theory Voltage Electrical engineering |
| Citations | 2 |
| Key findings | Four bias mitigation measures—independent data assessment, multisite trials, quantitative bias analysis, and open science practices—are recommended to improve methodological rigor in psychedelic RCTs. |
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard for demonstrating the efficacy of a treatment or intervention; however, the RCT study design alone is insufficient to prevent all forms of bias. In this paper, we review conflicts of interest and other biases that pose challenges to the methodological rigor of psychedelic RCTs, and explore recommended bias mitigation measures. We focus on biases of special relevance to psychedelic RCTs and methods of mitigating bias that we believe are actionable and urgent practices to implement in psychedelic research: (1) independent data assessment, (2) multisite trials, (3) quantitative bias analysis, and (4) open science practices. Although we advocate for the adoption of these practices in psychedelic research, they are not psychedelic specific. We suggest that the challenges posed by psychedelic research offer an opportunity for researchers to creatively find and implement solutions across the study lifecycle to reduce bias in other fields of clinical research.