Samuel Streicher, Christopher Register, Xiu Lim, Maide Barış, Sebastian Porsdam Mann, Katherine Cheung, Emma C Gordon, David Yaden, Julian Savulescu, Brian D Earp
{"title":"Psychedelics as moral bioenhancers: Protocol for a scoping review of ethical arguments for and against.","authors":"Samuel Streicher, Christopher Register, Xiu Lim, Maide Barış, Sebastian Porsdam Mann, Katherine Cheung, Emma C Gordon, David Yaden, Julian Savulescu, Brian D Earp","doi":"10.12688/wellcomeopenres.23414.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Moral bioenhancement typically refers to the deliberate use of drugs or biotechnologies, potentially alongside other practices, to attempt to improve oneself morally. In addition to general concerns regarding moral self-bioenhancement, the possibility of using psychedelic substances for such purposes raises distinct ethical questions. As a first step in analysing these questions, we intend to perform a scoping review of the existing arguments for and against the use of psychedelics as moral bioenhancers. We will focus primarily on voluntary use by individuals, although voluntary use by couples or small groups will be considered. The present contribution is a protocol for this scoping review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Our scoping review will adhere to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, which involves five stages: (1) identifying the research question, (2) developing the search strategy, (3) setting inclusion criteria, (4) extracting data, and (5) presenting and analysing the results. We will include both published and unpublished sources if they explicitly present ethical arguments for or against the voluntary use of psychedelics as intentional moral bioenhancers in adults. We will search for relevant studies in Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, The National Library of Medicine, the Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Philosopher's Index, the Bioethics Literature Database, EthxWeb, PhilPapers, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Philosopher's Index, EBSCO, BASE, and WorldCat. Sources will be excluded if (a) the full text is inaccessible, (b) the main text is in a language other than English, or (c) the focus is not primarily on ethical arguments (for example, focusing primarily on the clinical use of psychedelics for treatment). Two raters will independently assess all articles for eligibility, with disagreements to be resolved with a third reviewer. Data from eligible articles will be charted using a standardised data extraction form. The data will be analysed following PRISMA-ScR guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":23677,"journal":{"name":"Wellcome Open Research","volume":"10 ","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11933787/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wellcome Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.23414.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Moral bioenhancement typically refers to the deliberate use of drugs or biotechnologies, potentially alongside other practices, to attempt to improve oneself morally. In addition to general concerns regarding moral self-bioenhancement, the possibility of using psychedelic substances for such purposes raises distinct ethical questions. As a first step in analysing these questions, we intend to perform a scoping review of the existing arguments for and against the use of psychedelics as moral bioenhancers. We will focus primarily on voluntary use by individuals, although voluntary use by couples or small groups will be considered. The present contribution is a protocol for this scoping review.
Methods: Our scoping review will adhere to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, which involves five stages: (1) identifying the research question, (2) developing the search strategy, (3) setting inclusion criteria, (4) extracting data, and (5) presenting and analysing the results. We will include both published and unpublished sources if they explicitly present ethical arguments for or against the voluntary use of psychedelics as intentional moral bioenhancers in adults. We will search for relevant studies in Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, The National Library of Medicine, the Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Philosopher's Index, the Bioethics Literature Database, EthxWeb, PhilPapers, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Philosopher's Index, EBSCO, BASE, and WorldCat. Sources will be excluded if (a) the full text is inaccessible, (b) the main text is in a language other than English, or (c) the focus is not primarily on ethical arguments (for example, focusing primarily on the clinical use of psychedelics for treatment). Two raters will independently assess all articles for eligibility, with disagreements to be resolved with a third reviewer. Data from eligible articles will be charted using a standardised data extraction form. The data will be analysed following PRISMA-ScR guidelines.
Wellcome Open ResearchBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
426
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍:
Wellcome Open Research publishes scholarly articles reporting any basic scientific, translational and clinical research that has been funded (or co-funded) by Wellcome. Each publication must have at least one author who has been, or still is, a recipient of a Wellcome grant. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others, is welcome and will be published irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies are all suitable. See the full list of article types here. All articles are published using a fully transparent, author-driven model: the authors are solely responsible for the content of their article. Invited peer review takes place openly after publication, and the authors play a crucial role in ensuring that the article is peer-reviewed by independent experts in a timely manner. Articles that pass peer review will be indexed in PubMed and elsewhere. Wellcome Open Research is an Open Research platform: all articles are published open access; the publishing and peer-review processes are fully transparent; and authors are asked to include detailed descriptions of methods and to provide full and easy access to source data underlying the results to improve reproducibility.