Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26835389›Full record

ReviewTranslational pediatrics2015

Cannabinoids for pediatric epilepsy? Up in smoke or real science?

Francis M Filloux

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Endocannabinoid System in Pediatric Inflammatory and Immune Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A case for cannabidiol in Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome seizure management.American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2017
    Article
  12. KBG syndrome involving a single-nucleotide duplication inCold Spring Harbor molecular case studies · 2016
    Article
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

1 author.

Francis M FillouxDivision of Pediatric Neurology, University of Utah School of Medicine and Primary Children's Hospital, Division of Pediatric Neurology, Salt Lake City, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public interest in the use of "medical marijuana" for the treatment of childhood epilepsy has burgeoned in the last few years. This has occurred in parallel with a growing interest in "medical marijuana" in general. Physicians and pediatricians must balance their patients' desire for immediate access to these products with the tenets of evidence-based medicine. This review discusses the biochemistry of cannabis products (the phytocannabinoids) setting this in the context of the endogenous endocannabinoid system. The differing and potentially modulating effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are reviewed. The evidence-base supporting or not the use of cannabis products for the treatment of neurological disease and specifically epilepsy is explored. The potential for adverse effects and particularly of neurotoxicity is addressed. Finally, public health and sociocultural implications are touched upon. Specific recommendations for interested physicians are provided including advocacy for patients and for a change in the "scheduling" of cannabis in order to better foster much-needed high-quality scientific research in this important area.

Indexed as

Cannabidiol (CBD)cannabisepilepsymedical marijuanatetrahydrocannabinol (THC)

Identifiers

PMID26835389
PMCPMC4729003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.