Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41661909›Full record

ArticlePLOS mental health2025

Ketamine for mental health - A naturalistic inventory of prescribing practices, safety, and adverse effects.

Maegan Stuart, Ian Stefanuk, Rebecca Comeau, Atul Khullar, Jennifer Swainson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Maegan StuartNorthern Ontario School of Medicine, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8597-3885
Ian StefanukDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1468-6923
Rebecca ComeauNorthern Ontario School of Medicine, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada.
Atul KhullarDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Jennifer SwainsonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6071-1395

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ketamine is an NMDA receptor antagonist, long used for its anesthetic and pain reducing properties, but has more recently demonstrated efficacy for treating depression. Evidence is also emerging for other psychiatric indications including posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorders, obsessive compulsive disorder, and to support psychotherapy. In this context, there is greater demand for its use in various forms including intravenous, intramuscular, subcutaneous, intranasal, oral, and sublingual administration. While intravenous administration typically requires administration and monitoring in a healthcare setting, the safety precautions for other forms of ketamine are unclear. Limited data in this regard may elicit controversy among prescribers, who wish to improve patient access, and among regulatory bodies, who may impose limitations based on IV ketamine data. This project aims to bridge the gap between current literature and the clinical experience and opinions of ketamine prescribers. This information was obtained in the form of a survey and answered: "How do prescribers of ketamine, with emphasis on psychiatric care providers, find its safety profile and in what ways have they prescribed ketamine?" Information was gathered on prescriber profiles, indications for ketamine use, doses and routes of ketamine prescribed, side effects and adverse events, and prescribers' opinions regarding monitoring requirements. Results were obtained from 45 providers with more than 1000 patient encounters over two countries. Non-IV forms of ketamine were commonly used, and the survey reported a favorable safety profile for ketamine. Non-IV Ketamine was reported to be safely utilized in a clinic setting with minimal monitoring and safety equipment, or at times, for home use. While survey results carry limitations, it appears that safety is dependent on dose and route, and strict universal regulations for all formulations may unnecessarily limit patient access.

Identifiers

PMID41661909
PMCPMC12798408

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.