Transparency report
How we differ from other psychedelic therapy directories
Patients choosing psychedelic therapy are making YMYL decisions (Your Money or Your Life). The directory you start from shapes those decisions. This is our honest accounting of how LicensedPsychedelics' methodology differs from the four most-cited alternatives - and where each is genuinely the better tool for a given task.
| Attribute | LicensedPsychedelics | Psychable | HealingMaps | Spravato Finder | Fluence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| License cross-checked against issuing body | Yes - automated daily for FDA REMS, weekly for OHA / DORA | Self-reported by listed practitioner | Self-reported, mixed verification | Yes (FDA REMS only - they are the manufacturer) | Training credential cross-checked; license self-reported |
| Visible last-verified timestamp on each listing | Yes - per license, with relative date | No | No | No | No |
| Public methodology document | Yes - /how-we-verify | Partial | No | No | Partial |
| Open-licensed data export | Yes - CC BY 4.0, CSV + JSON | No | No | No | No |
| Public license-verification API | Yes - /api/verify/{licenseNumber} | No | No | No | No |
| Both clinic + at-home programs in scope | Yes | Clinic only | Clinic only | Spravato only | Therapist-trained network only |
| Pay-to-list / pay-to-rank | No - free verified listing forever; ranking independent of payment | Subscription tier for practitioners | Subscription tier | Manufacturer-funded | Training-graduate gated |
| Affiliate / commercial conflict on listing rank | Yes for telehealth comparison pages (disclosed); no for directory ranking | Mixed disclosure | Mixed disclosure | Manufacturer-affiliated by design | Network-affiliated by design |
| Public corrections / re-verification request flow | Yes - /claim?report=1, 48-hour SLA | Email only | Email only | n/a | Email only |
Use us when
- You want a license verified against the issuing body before booking.
- You want clinic + at-home telehealth in one place.
- You are a journalist, researcher or developer who wants machine-readable data.
Use Spravato Finder when
You only need a Spravato REMS-certified site and trust the manufacturer's directory directly. They have access we do not - it is their drug.
Use Fluence when
You specifically want a therapist trained in the Fluence psychedelic-integration curriculum. They are the credentialing body for that training.
Honest answers to honest questions
Why publish a transparency report at all?
Because YMYL (Your Money or Your Life) directories like ours need to be auditable. Patients with depression, PTSD, opioid use disorder, and TRD are making consequential decisions based on what we publish. The way we earn that trust is by showing our work - methodology, sources, conflict-of-interest, comparison to alternatives - rather than asking readers to take our word for it.
Are you saying other directories are wrong or bad?
No. Each directory has a defensible reason for the design choices it has made. Psychable was built when the field was earlier and self-reporting was the only practical option. Spravato Finder is openly run by the manufacturer. Fluence is openly a training network. We are pointing out the structural choices each made, and what we did differently. Patients should choose the directory whose model matches what they need.
What is your conflict of interest?
Three real ones, fully disclosed: (1) Clinics can pay for a 'claim your listing' subscription, but the listing exists for free regardless. (2) On at-home ketamine telehealth comparison pages we may earn affiliate commission from programs we do recommend; this is disclosed page-by-page and never affects directory ranking. (3) The founder runs an SEO agency (GetNifty); this site is not a client and operates independently of agency revenue.
How do I challenge a listing or report a problem?
Email editorial@licensedpsychedelics.com or use the 'Flag for re-check' link on any provider page. We re-verify within 48 hours. If the issue is a license dispute (claimed credentialing that we cannot match against the issuing body), we publish a public note on the listing while the dispute is open.
Why publish your data under CC BY 4.0?
Open licensing forces us to keep the dataset clean and re-distributable. Journalists can cite it. Researchers can analyse it. Other directories can re-use it (with attribution). Our defensibility moves from 'who controls the data' to 'who runs the verification pipeline best' - which is the right place for it to be in a public-interest medical directory.