Sascha B. Thal, Paris Baker, Jonathon Marinis, Michelle Wieberneit, Jason M. Sharbanee, Raimundo Bruno, Petra M. Skeffington, Stephen J. Bright
Abstract
Serotonergic psychedelics and related substances have been explored as potential adjuncts in substance-assisted psychotherapy (SAPT) for treating various disorders. SAPT can be divided into three phases: preparation, administration and integration. Integration is commonly defined as the comprehension and effective application of insights from psychedelic experiences into everyday life. However, there is limited research regarding the most appropriate therapeutic approach during SAPT. In this article, we discuss the current evidence for different therapeutic frameworks for integration sessions when serotonergic psychedelics and entactogens are used as adjuncts to psychotherapy. We conducted a systematised review of the literature following PRISMA guidelines and searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases. The final synthesis included 75 clinical trials, mixed-methods investigations, treatment manuals, study protocols, quasi-experiments, qualitative investigations, descriptive studies, opinion papers, reviews, books and book chapters, published until 11 November 2022. The effects that various therapeutic approaches for integration sessions have on therapeutic outcomes have not been investigated by means of rigorous research. Most of the available evidence we retrieved was not supported by empirical data, thus limiting any conclusive statements regarding appropriate therapeutic frameworks for integration sessions for SAPT. Current clinical studies have used a range of therapeutic frameworks with the majority drawing from the humanistic-experiential tradition. While integration is regarded as crucial for the safe application of SAPT, there is currently an insufficient evidence base to suggest that any type of therapy is effective for guiding integration sessions. A systematic investigation of different therapeutic frameworks for integration and additional therapy-related factors is needed.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,805,822
of 26,404,318 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy
#94
of 927 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,309
of 383,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,404,318 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 927 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 383,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
