UK medical students’ self-reported knowledge and harm assessment of psychedelics and their application in clinical research: a cross-sectional study - Song-Smith, Charlie; Jacobs, Edward; Rucker, James; Saint, Matthew; Cooke, James; Schlosser, Marco (medRxiv, 2023)
Objective To capture UK medical students’ self-reported knowledge and harm assessment of psychedelics and to explore the factors associated with support for changing the legal status of psychedelics to facilitate further research.Design Cross-sectional, anonymous online survey of UK medical students using a non-random sampling method.Setting UK medical schools recognised by the General Medical Council.Participants The sample consisted of 132 medical students who had spent an average of 3.8 years (SD=1.4; range: 1 to 6) in medical school.Results Most students (83%) reported that they were aware of psychedelic research and only four participants (3%) said that they were not interested in learning more about this type of research. Although medical students’ harm assessment of psychedelics closely aligned with that of experts, only 17% of students felt well-educated on psychedelic research. Teachings on psychedelics were only rarely encountered in their curriculum. Time spent at medical schools was not associated with more knowledge about psychedelics. On average, this sample of medical students showed strong support for changing the legal status of psychedelics to facilitate further research into their potential clinical applications. Regression modelling indicated that greater knowledge of psychedelics, lower estimated harm scores, more time spent in medical school, and lower perceived effectiveness of nonpharmacological mental health treatments were associated with a support for legal status change.Conclusions This is the first study to explore UK medical students’ self-reported knowledge and attitudes towards psychedelics and their application in clinical research. Our findings reveal a significant interest among medical students to learn more about psychedelic research and a strong support for further psychedelic research. Future studies are needed to examine how medical education could be refined to adequately prepare medical students for a changing healthcare landscape in which psychedelic-assisted therapy could soon be implemented in clinical practice.Strengths and limitations of this studyThis study presents the first survey of UK medical students’ attitudes towards psychedelics and their application in clinical research.The wide-ranging assessment included medical students’ self-reported knowledge of psychedelics, a multidimensional harm assessment of psychedelics, level of support for changing the legal status of psychedelics to facilitate further research into their potential clinical applications, and students’ perceptions of medical education on psychedelics and psychedelic research.The cross-sectional nature of our data prevented us from drawing causal conclusions about potential changes in students’ attitudes and knowledge over time.The limited range of demographic variables did not allow for an in-depth characterisation of this sample and important predictors of attitudes might have been missed. Non-random sampling and selection bias could have impacted the generalisability of our findings as students already interested in drugs might have been more likely to participate.Competing Interest StatementJames Rucker has received payments for advisory work from Clerkenwell Health (Past), Beckley PsyTech (Past), Delica Therapeutics (Past), for articles written for Janssen, and financial assistance for attendance at conferences from Compass Pathways (past) and Janssen. James Rucker has received grant funding (received and managed by King’s College London) from Compass Pathfinder, Beckley PsyTech, Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, National Institute for Health Research, Wellcome Trust, Biomedical Research Centre at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests.Funding StatementThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. James Rucker received salary support via the NIHR Clinician Scientist Fellowship Programme during the period of this research (CS-2017-17-007).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:University College London’s Research Ethics Committee gave ethical approval for this work (Project ID: 14309/007).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced are available online at https://osf.io/tmp3u/.