Activity

Activity ID

14982

Expires

April 15, 2029

Format Type

Journal-based

CME Credit

1

Fee

$30

CME Provider: JAMA Psychiatry

Description of CME Course

Importance  Psychedelic drugs possess acute psychoactive effects that can compromise blinding integrity in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Functional unblinding, when participants or raters correctly identify treatment allocation based on subjective effects, may bias outcomes through expectancy effects, challenging the validity of efficacy estimates and regulatory acceptance.

Objective  To systematically quantify the prevalence of blinding integrity assessment and the extent of functional unblinding in psychedelic RCTs for psychiatric disorders.

Evidence Review  A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines across OVID, MEDLINE, Embase, and APA PsycINFO (January 1, 2020, to December 11, 2025), supplemented by manual searches of 3 prior reviews for studies prior to January 2020. Eligible studies included all RCTs investigating psychedelics as psychiatric interventions. Data extracted included blinding integrity assessment methods and results for participants and raters.

Findings  Of 112 RCTs (11 psilocybin, 17 lysergic acid diethylamide [LSD], 78 ketamine, 11 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine [MDMA], 2 ayahuasca, 2 N,N-dimethyltryptamine [DMT], and 1 noribogaine), only 29.5% (n = 33) evaluated blinding integrity, yet 57.1% (n = 64) cited blinding as a limitation. Functional unblinding was substantial: psilocybin, LSD, and ayahuasca studies frequently reported blinding failure values of more than 90% among participants and raters, inert placebo-controlled MDMA trials exceeded 85%, and ketamine trials rarely assessed blinding (17.9%) but showed improved preservation with midazolam vs saline controls. No control strategy consistently achieved ideal blinding.

Conclusions and Relevance  This first evaluation of blinding integrity in psychedelic RCTs indicates functional unblinding is pervasive among participants and raters raising concerns about the validity of efficacy findings. Few trials assess blinding or expectancy, highlighting the need for standardized, validated measures and innovative designs to separate true pharmacological effects from expectancy-driven responses.

Disclaimers

1. This activity is accredited by the American Medical Association.
2. This activity is free to AMA members.

Register for this Activity

ABMS Member Board Approvals by Type
More Information
Commercial Support?
No

NOTE: If a Member Board has not deemed this activity for MOC approval as an accredited CME activity, this activity may count toward an ABMS Member Board’s general CME requirement. Please refer directly to your Member Board’s MOC Part II Lifelong Learning and Self-Assessment Program Requirements.

Educational Objectives

To identify the key insights or developments described in this article

Keywords

Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, Anesthesiology

Competencies

Medical Knowledge

CME Credit Type

AMA PRA Category 1 Credit

DOI

10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2026.0255

View All Activities by this CME Provider

The information provided on this page is subject to change. Please refer to the CME Provider’s website to confirm the most current information.