Ethical Issues and Recommendations in Psychedelic Research and Practice: A Scoping Review
N Brittain, Nicholas Higgins, Mary Barber, Wonyong Choi, Adrian Carter, John F. Gardner · 2025 · 7 citationsRead the paper
The rapid growth in psychedelic research raises novel ethical challenges for both research and psychedelic-assisted therapy. Despite these challenges, there is no consensus among researchers, clinicians, patients, and regulators on how these ethical issues may be avoided or managed. This study aimed to identify key ethical issues in psychedelic research and practice in the literature. A scoping review was performed, identifying fifty-one relevant articles. Content analysis revealed five main ethical concerns in the literature: 1) standards of practice, 2) equity, 3) integrity, 4) cultural appropriation, and 5) epistemic justice. A consultation workshop highlighted several key concerns that were neglected in the literature: 1) post-trial care, 2) lack of consensus on models of care and psychedelic practitioner competencies, and 3) how current research and its associated ethical issues will be translated into practice. Based on these findings the following future directions are recommended: designing clear competency frameworks, increased consultation with Indigenous and priority populations (e.g. ethnic and cultural minorities, under-served groups), guidelines for Indigenous recognition, management of post-trial care in clinical trials, and adequate governance of psychedelic prescribing practices.
What the full text shows
Shown in the lab- Five main ethical themes identified in the literature: standards of practice, equity, integrity, cultural appropriation, and epistemic justice. (Based on content analysis of 51 articles)
- Non-maleficence (avoiding harm) is the most frequently discussed ethical principle. — Mentioned in 33 articles (Out of 51 articles)
- Significant lack of diversity in research leadership, with a heavy concentration of authors from the US. — 55.8% of first authors from the US (Across 51 articles)
- Low level of empirical research on PAT ethics and stakeholder engagement. — Only 9 of 51 articles used empirical methods; only 5 engaged stakeholders (Across 51 articles)
- Financial conflicts of interest are prevalent among authors. — 13 articles declared paid advisory roles or financial support from the industry (Across 51 articles)
- Consultation workshop identified critical gaps in literature: post-trial care, lack of practitioner competency frameworks, and translation of research to practice. (Based on a workshop with 8 interdisciplinary experts)
- Setup
- 51 articles published within the last five years; 8 workshop participants from research, healthcare, and commercial sectors.
- How
- A scoping review following PRISMA-ScR protocols was conducted using a systematic search of four databases, followed by content analysis in NVivo. Findings were further refined through an interdisciplinary consultation workshop with eight stakeholders.
- Limitations
- Frequency of mention in literature does not necessarily reflect moral significance. · Exclusion of grey literature (government/organizational reports). · Reliance on first-author affiliation for geographic and diversity data. · Small sample size for the consultation workshop (n=8).
Summarized by Gemma 4 from the open-access full text · 8 Oct 2026. Read it