31 Organisations

Real-World Data & Evidence Collection

Organisations building registries, outcome platforms, and data infrastructure to capture real-world evidence on psychedelic therapies.

Clinical trials answer whether a treatment can work under controlled conditions. What happens once psychedelics are used in the real world (in Oregon service centres, Australian clinics, or ceremonial settings) is a different evidence problem, and these are the organisations building the registries, outcome platforms, and safety-monitoring systems to answer it.

The organisations here differ on the questions that matter to a researcher or sponsor: what kind of data they hold (registry data, patient self-report, safety surveillance), whether you can access it, how current it is, and how their methods hold up. The profiles record each of these, with verification and freshness signals shown directly on the cards.

Organisations
31
Countries
1

Specific Groups

By country

Registry and data source comparison

OrganisationData TypeAccess ModelUpdate Cadence
America's Poison Centers
Safety surveillance data
Case-by-case access
Real-time / continuous
Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry
Registry data
Open access
Daily
Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry
Registry data
Open access
Daily
CTIS (Clinical Trials Information System)
Registry data
Open access
Daily
Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR)
Registry data
Open access
Daily
Clarivate Cortellis
Mixed evidence
Paid / licensed access
Monthly
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry data
Open access
Daily
EMA EudraVigilance
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
Erowid Center
Patient self-report data
Open access
Ad-hoc / irregular
EudraCT (EU Clinical Trials Register, legacy)
Registry data
Open access
Ad-hoc / irregular
FDA Adverse Event Monitoring System (AEMS)
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
FDA MedWatch
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
German Clinical Trials Register
Registry data
Open access
Daily
Global Drug Survey
Patient self-report data
Registration required
Ad-hoc / irregular
HMA-EMA Catalogues of Real-World Data Sources and Studies
Mixed evidence
Open access
Weekly
Health Canada Canada Vigilance
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
IQVIA Real World Data
Mixed evidence
Paid / licensed access
Monthly
ISRCTN Registry
Registry data
Open access
Daily
MHRA Yellow Card
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
Medsafe & CARM Pharmacovigilance
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
PatientsLikeMe
Patient self-report data
Registration required
Daily
Quantified Citizen
Patient self-report data
Registration required
Ad-hoc / irregular
Rocky Mountain Poison & Drug Safety
Safety surveillance data
Case-by-case access
Daily
Singapore HSA Adverse Event Reporting
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
Swissmedic ElViS
Safety surveillance data
Registration required
Weekly
TGA DAEN
Safety surveillance data
Open access
Weekly
Uppsala Monitoring Centre
Safety surveillance data
Case-by-case access
Daily
WHO ICTRP
Registry data
Open access
Weekly

Showing the first 40 organisations with profile data; use the filters below to narrow the full list.

All Organisations

America's Poison Centers

Verified2 sources

US network of poison centers and national data system (NPDS) for toxicology and pharmacovigilance surveillance.

View Profile

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry

Verified3 sources

WHO primary clinical trial registry for Australia and New Zealand, used for trial discovery and protocol metadata. Psychedelic relevance: registry infrastructure includes psychedelic trial records via search, but no dedicated psychedelic evidence vertical.

View Profile

Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry

Verified3 sources

Brazil's public clinical trial registry platform for experimental and non-experimental studies in humans. Psychedelic-specific indexing is not offered as a dedicated registry surface.

View Profile

CTIS (Clinical Trials Information System)

Verified3 sources

EU clinical trial public portal with explicit psilocybin trial records currently visible.

View Profile

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR)

Verified3 sources

WHO primary trial registry for China with broad trial metadata coverage. Psychedelic-specific datasets are not presented as a dedicated public vertical.

View Profile
United States

Citeline

Other

Citeline (formerly Informa Pharma Intelligence) is a global pharmaceutical data and clinical intelligence platform providing AI-driven drug pipeline tracking, trial monitoring, and R&D analytics to life sciences organisations. It is referenced as a data source in the Department of Defense PTSD Adaptive Platform Trial involving SLS-002 (esketamine intranasal spray).

1 trial
View Profile

Clarivate Cortellis

Verified2 sources

Commercial intelligence platform with clinical, regulatory, and real-world evidence datasets for biopharma decision support.

View Profile

ClinicalTrials.gov

Verified3 sources

US National Library of Medicine registry and results database with broad global trial coverage, including many psychedelic studies.

View Profile

EMA EudraVigilance

Verified3 sources

European pharmacovigilance system for suspected adverse drug reaction reporting. Psychedelic relevance: EMA has hosted a multi-stakeholder psychedelics regulatory workshop and EudraVigilance is the key EU safety channel.

View Profile
United States

Erowid Center

Verified3 sources

Erowid Center is a nonprofit educational organization and public information resource on psychoactive substances, including the Erowid Experience Vaults user-report archive and broader harm reduction materials.

View Profile

EudraCT (EU Clinical Trials Register, legacy)

Verified3 sources

Legacy EU clinical trials register still relevant for historical records and legacy IDs linked from CTIS; includes trial history relevant to psychedelic development tracking.

View Profile

FDA Adverse Event Monitoring System (AEMS)

Verified2 sources

US FDA adverse-event monitoring infrastructure for regulated products. Psychedelic relevance: FDA has issued draft clinical trial guidance for psychedelic drugs and AEMS is the active public safety-monitoring surface.

View Profile

FDA MedWatch

Verified2 sources

US FDA adverse-event and product-problem reporting program with public safety communications and reporting channels.

View Profile

German Clinical Trials Register

Verified3 sources

Primary registry for clinical trials in Germany, recognized by WHO as the national primary registry. Psychedelic-specific data is not provided as a dedicated public vertical.

View Profile

Global Drug Survey

Verified3 sources

Global anonymous survey platform with explicit psychedelic-use and microdosing self-report outputs in periodic reports.

View Profile

HMA-EMA Catalogues of Real-World Data Sources and Studies

Verified3 sources

European catalogues that centralize metadata on real-world data sources and RWD studies for regulatory and research discoverability. These catalogues replaced older ENCePP/EU PAS register-era database surfaces.

View Profile

Health Canada Canada Vigilance

Verified2 sources

National adverse reaction reporting and access database for marketed health products in Canada. Psychedelic relevance: Health Canada publishes psilocybin-specific clinical-trial and special-access policy notices.

View Profile

IQVIA Real World Data

Verified2 sources

Commercial real-world data products and linked evidence assets used in life sciences research and regulatory support.

View Profile

ISRCTN Registry

Verified2 sources

Primary clinical trial registry with global participation and searchable records including psychedelic-related studies; no dedicated psychedelic-specific product surface.

View Profile

MHRA Yellow Card

Verified3 sources

UK safety reporting program for medicine and device adverse events. Psychedelic relevance: UK has active policy and trial activity, while public MHRA records indicate no authorized psilocybin medicinal product yet.

View Profile

Maya Health

Maya Health is a software platform, founded in 2019, that helps psychedelic-therapy practitioners track, measure and visualise client outcomes while building a real-world-data resource for the field. Growing out of academic work linked to Johns Hopkins and Unlimited Sciences, it connects practitioners, participants and researchers and offers analytics dashboards, validated outcome scales and structured session notes.

View Profile

Medsafe & CARM Pharmacovigilance

Verified3 sources

New Zealand pharmacovigilance infrastructure operated through Medsafe and CARM for adverse-reaction reporting, analysis, and signal monitoring. Public psychedelic-specific dashboards are limited; this profile is included as core safety infrastructure.

View Profile

Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb

Verified3 sources

National pharmacovigilance centre for the Netherlands supporting adverse drug reaction reporting, signal detection, and patient-reporting channels. Public psychedelic-specific evidence views are limited; this profile is included as core safety infrastructure.

View Profile

PatientsLikeMe

Verified3 sources

Patient network platform with treatment and condition self-reporting, including explicit psilocybin treatment pages and community-reported outcomes context.

View Profile

Quantified Citizen

Verified3 sources

Digital research platform running psychedelic self-report and behavioral studies through app-based participation, including Microdose.me cohorts.

View Profile

Rocky Mountain Poison & Drug Safety

Verified2 sources

US poison center and toxicology surveillance organization supporting data collection and safety monitoring operations.

View Profile

Singapore HSA Adverse Event Reporting

Verified2 sources

Singapore Health Sciences Authority adverse-event reporting framework for therapeutic products and clinical trials. Included as core safety-monitoring infrastructure; no dedicated psychedelic public reporting surface identified.

View Profile

Swissmedic ElViS

Verified2 sources

Swissmedic electronic vigilance infrastructure for adverse drug reaction reporting by healthcare professionals and companies in Switzerland. Included as core safety infrastructure; psychedelic-specific public slices are limited.

View Profile

TGA DAEN

Verified2 sources

Australian adverse-event notification database and safety-monitoring framework. Psychedelic relevance: TGA publishes dedicated policy and access guidance for MDMA and psilocybin use.

View Profile

Uppsala Monitoring Centre

Verified2 sources

WHO collaborating centre for international drug safety monitoring, stewarding VigiBase and global pharmacovigilance methods.

View Profile

WHO ICTRP

Verified2 sources

WHO global trial-search aggregator across multiple primary registries. Psychedelic records are present via source registries, but ICTRP does not provide a dedicated psychedelic evidence vertical.

View Profile

Frequently asked questions

What kinds of real-world data exist for psychedelics?

Three broad kinds. Centralised registries and data repositories aggregate structured records across sites. Patient-reported outcome platforms collect experiences and symptom measures directly from individuals. Post-market safety registries track adverse events once treatments reach practice. Each organisation here is classified into one of these groups.

Can I get access to these datasets for research?

Sometimes. Each profile records an access model, from open access through registration to paid licences and case-by-case agreements. The primary data link on each profile goes to the organisation’s own access point, which is where terms are stated authoritatively.

How trustworthy are these data sources?

We verify each profile against public sources and record a verification status, the date we last checked, and the number of source links, all visible on the category cards. A stale badge means the record has not been re-verified in over a year. None of this substitutes for reading the organisation’s own methodology notes, which the profiles summarise where available.

Why does real-world evidence matter if we have clinical trials?

Trials select their participants and control their settings; real-world use does neither. Regulators and payers (insurance companies) increasingly ask for evidence that effects and safety hold outside trial conditions, and state programmes such as Oregon’s generate exactly the naturalistic data trials cannot.