Meta-analysis · 2026
Review pooling 8 studies finds psychedelic experiences linked to lower death anxiety
- Original title
- Confronting mortality: A meta-analysis and systematic review of psychedelic experiences and death anxiety.
- Authors
- Cohorst A, Kajonius PJ
- Journal
- Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 2026
- Molecules
- Other
- Conditions
- Anxiety, End-of-life distress
- Evidence grade
- Low
- Source
- Read the original paper
The question
Do psychedelic experiences reduce death anxiety, meaning fear and distress about dying?
What they did
The authors searched the research literature for studies measuring death anxiety before and after psychedelic experiences. Eight studies provided enough data to be combined statistically, and 10 more were reviewed qualitatively. They also tested whether the setting, the substance used, or the intensity of a ‘mystical’ experience changed the results.
What they found
Pooling the eight studies gave an overall effect size of Cohen’s d = 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.97), described as a moderate-to-large drop in death anxiety after psychedelic administration. Effects were stronger in clinically controlled settings than in general-population studies. Reports of mystical experiences were associated with larger reductions (B = 4.90, p = 0.050). The type of substance did not significantly change the result. The qualitative review described themes of ego dissolution, emotional release, and living in the present.
The fine print
Only eight studies could be combined, and the abstract does not report how many people took part in total or which substances and doses were involved. The authors themselves flag likely publication bias, high variability in how death anxiety was measured, and the need for more rigorous trials. Pooled results from a small, mixed set of studies can overstate an effect. This summary is based on the abstract alone.
What it means
Across a small body of research, psychedelic experiences were associated with lower death anxiety, with the strongest signal in controlled clinical settings, but the evidence base is thin and uneven.
Evidence grade: Low. A pooled analysis of only eight studies of mixed design and setting, with high variation between studies and possible publication bias.
This summary is based on the study’s published abstract.