Aside from the minority opinion that meta-analysis is just inherently worthless, the only critique I've seen is that it is not fair to compare placebo controlled psychedelic data to open label traditional antidepressant data. But your analyses showed little (and no sig) diff between blinded and open label psychedelic trials. And difference between open and blinded traditional antidepressant trials was small. Formal stats aside, visually inspecting the distributions aligns with your conclusions: it's generally the same range of response. Neither one stands out with enormously more efficacy than the other. To me this is consistent with the only trial comparing SSRI to psilocybin head to head, with no sig difference on the primary depression outcome. I've seen depression patients for whom psilocybin doesn't work, so none of this surprises me. All of this is consistent with psychedelics having real efficacy, which is impressive given that you get these results with only 1 or 2 doses and you don't need ongoing blood levels of the drug to see the effect. Psychedelics still appear poised to be approvable by FDA and other regulatory bodies.