Can psychedelic clinical trials be better? Researchers say yes
· Medical Xpressby University of California, San Francisco
edited by Swati Mestri, reviewed by Robert Egan
Swati Mestri
Scientific Editor
Meet our editorial team
Behind our editorial process
Robert Egan
Senior Editor
Meet our editorial team
Behind our editorial process Editors' notes
This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:
fact-checked
peer-reviewed publication
trusted source
proofread
The GIST Add as preferred source
UC San Francisco researchers are weighing in on one of the biggest challenges in psychedelic science, arguing that clinical trials need more convincing placebo treatments to better measure the drugs' true effects.
The debate hinges on "masking," the clinical trial gold standard that keeps patients and researchers from knowing who receives the active drug or a placebo. Because psychedelics produce such distinctive effects, participants can almost always tell whether they got the real thing. That makes it hard to separate a drug's effects from the power of expectation, including the disappointment patients feel when they realize they did not receive the psychedelic.
In a perspective published Sept. 16 in JAMA Psychiatry, researchers from UCSF, UC San Diego and Stanford University call for a more aggressive approach to preserving masking in psychedelic clinical trials. The paper arrives as psychedelic research gains momentum and regulators face growing pressure to decide how these treatments should be evaluated and approved.
A tougher test for masking
Instead of relying on active placebos such as niacin, which can cause flushing but little else resembling a psychedelic experience, the researchers propose carefully designed combinations of approved drugs to create a more convincing placebo. They also recommend limiting what participants are told about the study, making it harder to guess which treatment they received.
Psychedelics for serious mental illness have drawn growing interest because many patients do not respond to existing treatments. The authors argue that if researchers too readily accept failed masking as unavoidable, these compounds will never be rigorously tested.
"People say psychedelics can't be masked, so we should stop trying and just move on, because the effects are so obvious," said Josh D. Woolley, M.D., Ph.D., associate professor in residence of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at UCSF and the paper's senior author.
"But medicine has been fooled by obvious effects before. Heart stents for stable chest pain and knee arthroscopy for arthritis both looked effective until sham-controlled trials showed they weren't. We're excited about this paper because it outlines a novel approach that might finally make effective masking possible for psychedelics."
An altered state by design
The proposed strategy, called UMBRAA, short for Unidentifiable Multidrug Blinding with Reduced, Authorized Awareness, combines carefully selected FDA-approved drugs with limited disclosure to study participants about the drugs they may receive, making it harder for them to guess whether they are in the active treatment or placebo-controlled arm of the study.
For example, a placebo might combine drugs from different classes, such as a sedative, a stimulant and a cannabinoid. The researchers hypothesize that pairing drugs with different effects could create an intense, unfamiliar altered state that is harder to distinguish from psilocybin than current controls.
The researchers acknowledge that UMBRAA raises safety and ethical concerns and would require careful screening, close medical monitoring and regulatory oversight.
They stress that the framework is a proposal, not a proven method. Future research will need to identify safe drug combinations, test whether they improve masking and establish appropriate safeguards.
Publication details
JAMA Psychiatry (2026). DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2026.2858
Journal information: JAMA Psychiatry
Key medical concepts
Clinical categories
PsychiatryClinical pharmacology Provided by University of California, San Francisco Who's behind this story?
Swati Mestri
Swati Mestri holds a bachelor's degree in Electronics Engineering and has worked as a content editor since 2019. She has experience editing research documents across technology, health care, and materials science, and has a particular interest in technology and space. Full profile →
Robert Egan
Bachelor's in mathematical biology, Master's in creative writing. Well-traveled with unique perspectives on science and language. Full profile →
Citation: Can psychedelic clinical trials be better? Researchers say yes (2026, September 16) retrieved 16 September 2026 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-09-psychedelic-clinical-trials.html This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.