Reply to ‘Methodological concerns and interpretative limitations of assessing subjective effects of ketamine’

npj Mental Health Research, vol. 5

Abstract

This response addresses methodological concerns raised regarding our meta-analysis of subjective effects and therapeutic outcomes following ketamine and psilocybin treatment. We discuss the potential influence of psychotherapy and differences in subjective-effect questionnaires across studies, acknowledging these as important limitations. We argue that these factors may partly explain observed treatment differences and highlight the need for future studies using standardized, multidimensional measures of subjective experience.

Authors 4

1. Jack D. C. Dahan

   Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · Amsterdam University Medical Centers

   Affiliation as printed

   Location Academic Medical Center (AMC), Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

2. David Dadiomov

   University of Southern California

   Affiliation as printed

   Los Angeles General Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA

   USC Alfred E. Mann School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Los Angeles, CA, USA

3. Tijmen Bostoen Aachen Department of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center

   Leiden University Medical Center · Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group

   Affiliation as printed

   ARQ National Psychotrauma Center, Diemen, the Netherlands

   Department of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands

4. Albert Dahan corresponding Aachen Centre for Human Drug Research (CHDR)

   Centre for Human Drug Research

   Affiliation as printed

   Centre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, the Netherlands. a.dahan9@upcmail.nl

   MediD Consultancy Group, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. a.dahan9@upcmail.nl