Funding Success of United States Federal Grant Applications Proposing to Study Therapeutic Applications of Psychedelics: A Survey Study

The author surveyed researchers about United States federal grant applications for therapeutic psychedelic research and their funding success. An anonymous survey was sent to corresponding authors of the 50 most-cited psychedelic research articles published after 2000 and also disseminated on Twitter. Ten researchers responded, reporting on 24 National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant applications for psilocybin, ibogaine, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), and other psychedelics, dating back to the early 1990s. Grant applications increased noticeably after 2006. Of the applications assessed, 16.7% were funded, below the NIH’s 23.4% average funding rate for R01-equivalent grants from 1998 to 2023. While no applications submitted before 2006–2010 were funded, the funding rate since then (19.05–22.2%) aligns with the NIH’s 20.6 ± 1.9% annual average for R01-equivalent grants from 2006 to 2023. Respondents generally perceived funding for psychedelic research as more difficult to obtain than for other areas, though recent improvements were noted. If the analyzed applications represent only a small subset of total submissions of applications proposing to study therapeutic applications of psychedelics, the findings may have limited generalizability and larger-scale validation studies would be required. However, this is difficult to determine since detailed data on unfunded NIH applications are not publicly available.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Psychoactives
Published
2025-02-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/psychoactives4010004
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Psychedelics and Drug Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.53

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Funding Success of United States Federal Grant Applications Proposing to Study Therapeutic Applications of Psychedelics: A Survey Study

Brian S. Barnett
5 citations
Psychoactives
Psychedelics and Drug Studies
11.53
article

Funding Success of United States Federal Grant Applications Proposing to Study Therapeutic Applications of Psychedelics: A Survey Study

Brian S. Barnett
article en
5 citations

Abstract

The author surveyed researchers about United States federal grant applications for therapeutic psychedelic research and their funding success. An anonymous survey was sent to corresponding authors of the 50 most-cited psychedelic research articles published after 2000 and also disseminated on Twitter. Ten researchers responded, reporting on 24 National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant applications for psilocybin, ibogaine, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), and other psychedelics, dating back to the early 1990s. Grant applications increased noticeably after 2006. Of the applications assessed, 16.7% were funded, below the NIH’s 23.4% average funding rate for R01-equivalent grants from 1998 to 2023. While no applications submitted before 2006–2010 were funded, the funding rate since then (19.05–22.2%) aligns with the NIH’s 20.6 ± 1.9% annual average for R01-equivalent grants from 2006 to 2023. Respondents generally perceived funding for psychedelic research as more difficult to obtain than for other areas, though recent improvements were noted. If the analyzed applications represent only a small subset of total submissions of applications proposing to study therapeutic applications of psychedelics, the findings may have limited generalizability and larger-scale validation studies would be required. However, this is difficult to determine since detailed data on unfunded NIH applications are not publicly available.

PsychoactivesVol. 4(1)
Cleveland Clinic (US), Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine (US), Case Western Reserve University (US)
National Institutes of Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Psychedelics and Drug Studies
11.53
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.