Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25888752›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2015

Cannabis in medicine: a national educational needs assessment among Canadian physicians.

Daniel Ziemianski, Rielle Capler, Rory Tekanoff, Anaïs Lacasse, Francesca Luconi, Mark A Ware

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Simplified guideline for prescribing medical cannabinoids in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018
    Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. ATTITUDES AND PRACTICE PATTERNS OF CANADIAN PHYSIATRISTS REGARDING MEDICAL CANNABIS.Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Daniel ZiemianskiAlan Edwards Pain Management Unit, McGill University Health Center Research Institute; Canadian Consortium for the Investigation of Cannabinoids, A5.140 Montreal General Hospital, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, H3G 1A4, Canada. Daniel.ziemianski@muhc.mcgill.ca.
Rielle CaplerInterdisciplinary Studies Graduate Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. rielle@telus.net.
Rory TekanoffCommunity Programs, Urban Care Health Group, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. rory@urbancarehealth.com.
Anaïs LacasseDépartement des sciences de la santé, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Québec, Canada. Anais.Lacasse@uqat.ca.
Francesca LuconiContinuing Health Professional Education, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada. francesca.luconi@mcgill.ca.
Mark A WareAlan Edwards Pain Management Unit, McGill University Health Center Research Institute; Canadian Consortium for the Investigation of Cannabinoids, A5.140 Montreal General Hospital, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, H3G 1A4, Canada. mark.ware@mcgill.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing global awareness and interest in the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes (CTP). It is clear that health care professionals need to be involved in these decisions, but often lack the education needed to engage in informed discussions with patients. This study was conducted to determine the educational needs of Canadian physicians regarding CTP.

methodsA national needs assessment survey was developed based on previous survey tools. The survey was approved by the Research Ethics Board of the McGill University Health Centre Research Institute and was provided online using LimeSurvey®. Several national physician organizations and medical education organizations informed their members of the survey. The target audience was Canadian physicians. We sought to identify and rank using 5-point Likert scales the most common factors involved in decision making about using CTP in the following categories: knowledge, experience, attitudes, and barriers. Preferred educational approaches and physician demographics were collected. Gap analysis was conducted to determine the magnitude and importance of differences between perceived and desired knowledge on all decision factors.

resultsFour hundred and twenty six responses were received, and physician responses were distributed across Canada consistent with national physician distribution. The most desired knowledge concerned "potential risks of using CTP" and "safety, warning signs and precautions for patients using CTP". The largest gap between perceived current and desired knowledge levels was "dosing" and "the development of treatment plans".

conclusionsWe have identified several key educational needs among Canadian physicians regarding CTP. These data can be used to develop resources and educational programs to support clinicians in this area, as well as to guide further research to inform these gaps.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelSurveys and QuestionnairesAdultCanadaEducation, Medical, ContinuingFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleMedical MarijuanaMiddle AgedNeeds AssessmentPharmacology, ClinicalPhysician-Patient RelationsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Risk AssessmentMedical Marijuana

Identifiers

PMID25888752
PMCPMC4374299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.