Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24556155›Full record

ArticleAddictive behaviors2014

Cannabis use and neurocognitive functioning in a non-clinical sample of users.

April D Thames, Natalie Arbid, Philip Sayegh

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addictive behaviors, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03662737 (A Visuomotor Rotation Task as a Biomarker of Cerebellar Dysfunction in Chronic Cannabis Use), which is not on this map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03662737 completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

A Visuomotor Rotation Task as a Biomarker of Cerebellar Dysfunction in Chronic Cannabis Use

TypeobservationalSponsorHospital Clinic of BarcelonaRan2019 to 2021Enrolled61ConditionsCannabis Use, Alcohol Use Disorder, HealthyArmsVisuomotor adaptation task
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Neuropsychological performance in young adults with cannabis use disorder.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2021
    Article
  14. The Effects of Cannabis Use on Cognitive Function in Healthy Aging: A Systematic Scoping Review.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

April D ThamesDepartment of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, 740 Westwood Plaza C8-226, Los Angeles, CA 90095, United States. Electronic address: athames@mednet.ucla.edu.
Natalie ArbidGreater Los Angeles VA Healthcare System, 11301 Wilshire Blvd Building 226, Los Angeles, CA 90024, United States.
Philip SayeghDepartment of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, 740 Westwood Plaza C8-226, Los Angeles, CA 90095, United States.
University of California, Los Angeles · USVA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System · US

Funding

The Mount Sinai Institute for NeuroAIDS DisparitiesR25MH080663 · NIMH · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI MORGELLO, SUSAN · 2007 to 2015
$2.1M
Neurobehavioral and Functional Consequences of HIV in African AmericansK23MH095661 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI THAMES, APRIL D · 2012 to 2016
$1.0M
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH095661NIMH NIH HHS R25 MH080663
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWith the recent debates over marijuana legalization and increases in use, it is critical to examine its role in cognition. While many studies generally support the adverse acute effects of cannabis on neurocognition, the non-acute effects remain less clear. The current study used a cross-sectional design to examine relationships between recent and past cannabis use on neurocognitive functioning in a non-clinical adult sample.

methodOne hundred and fifty-eight participants were recruited through fliers distributed around local college campuses and the community. All participants completed the Brief Drug Use History Form, the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Disorders, and neurocognitive assessment, and underwent urine toxicology screening. Participants consisted of recent users (n=68), past users (n=41), and non-users (n=49).

resultsRecent users demonstrated significantly (p<.05) worse performance than non-users across cognitive domains of attention/working memory (M=42.4, SD=16.1 vs. M=50.5, SD=10.2), information processing speed (M=44.3, SD=7.3 vs. M=52.1, SD=11.0), and executive functioning (M=43.6, SD=13.4 vs. M=48.6, SD=7.2). There were no statistically significant differences between recent users and past users on neurocognitive performance. Frequency of cannabis use in the last 4 weeks was negatively associated with global neurocognitive performance and all individual cognitive domains. Similarly, amount of daily cannabis use was negatively associated with global neurocognitive performance and individual cognitive domains.

conclusionsOur results support the widespread adverse effects of cannabis use on neurocognitive functioning. Although some of these adverse effects appear to attenuate with abstinence, past users' neurocognitive functioning was consistently lower than non-users.

Indexed as

AdultAnalysis of VarianceCognition DisordersCross-Sectional StudiesExecutive FunctionFemaleHumansMaleMarijuana AbuseMemory, Short-TermAbstinenceAbuseCannabisCognitionPast usePremorbid IQ

Identifiers

PMID24556155
PMCPMC4032061
OpenAlexW2120862396

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.