Publication bias in randomized trials of psilocybin for depression: a Robust Bayesian Meta-Analysis
Abstract
<p>A recent living systematic review in Nature Mental Health found psilocybin reduced depression symptoms across 12 randomized controlled trials, with pooled effect g = 0.90. The original analysis assessed publication bias using Egger’s test, non-significant — but this test has limited power with few studies and cannot produce a bias-corrected estimate. We re-analysed the same open dataset using Robust Bayesian Meta-Analysis (RoBMA), which simultaneously estimates evidence for a treatment effect, heterogeneity, and publication bias. We find moderate evidence for publication bias (Bayes Factor = 3.89). After accounting for selective reporting, the bias-corrected effect (g ≈ 0.53) is ~41% smaller than published, with a credible interval spanning to zero. This evidence dissipates when open-label studies are excluded, suggesting expectancy-driven artefacts rather than file-drawer suppression. These findings do not overturn the original conclusions but indicate greater uncertainty than the frequentist analysis implies.</p>
Topics & conditions
Detected automatically by Psychedelic Commons from the title and abstract, not labels from the source. They may be incomplete.
Psychedelic Commons aggregates metadata from open sources and links back to the original. Rights remain with the authors and publishers. Something wrong with this record? Report a problem.