Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28189459›Full record

ReviewThe International journal on drug policy2017

Building smart cannabis policy from the science up.

Susan R B Weiss, Katia D Howlett, Ruben D Baler

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The International journal on drug policy, 2017. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Cannabis use and cannabis use disorder.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2021
    Review
  4. The importance of psychology for shaping legal cannabis regulation.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2021
    Review
  5. International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Cannabis regulatory science: risk-benefit considerations for mental disorders.International review of psychiatry (Abingdon, England) · 2018
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Setting the Legal Age for Access to Cannabis in Canada: Bridging Neuroscience, Policy, and Prevention.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2018
    Article
  12. 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

3 authors.

Susan R B WeissNational Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, United States. Electronic address: sweiss@nida.nih.gov.
Katia D HowlettNational Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, United States.
Ruben D BalerNational Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, United States.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 DA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social attitudes and cultural norms around the issue of substance abuse are shifting rapidly around the world, leading to complex and unpredictable consequences. On the positive side, efforts to more intensely disseminate the scientific evidence for the many connections between chronic substance use and the emergence of measurable and discrete brain dysfunctions, has ushered in an evolving climate of acceptance and a new era of improved access to more effective interventions, at least in the United States. On the negative side, there has been a steady erosion in the public perception of the harms associated with the use of popular drugs, especially cannabis. This worrisome trend has sprouted at the convergence of several forces that have combined, more or less fortuitously, to effectively change long-standing policies away from prohibition and toward decriminalization or legalization. These forces include the outsized popularity of the cannabis plant among recreational users, the unflagging campaign by corporate lobbyists and patient advocates to mainstream its medicinal use, and the honest realization in some quarters of the deleterious impact of the drug war and its draconian cannabis laws, in particular, on society's most vulnerable populations. Updating drug policies is a desirable goal, and significant changes may indeed be warranted. However, there is a real concern when policy changes are hurriedly implemented without the required input from the medical, scientific, or policy research communities. Regardless of how well intentioned, such initiatives are bound to magnify the potential for unintended adverse consequences in the form of far ranging health and social costs. To minimize this risk, science must be front and center in this important policy debate. Here, we review the state of the science on cannabis and cannabinoid health effects, both adverse and therapeutic. We focus on the prevalence of use in different populations, the mechanisms by which cannabis exerts its effects (i.e., via the endocannabinoid system), and the double-edged potential of this system to inspire new medications, on one hand, and to cause short and long term harmful effects on the other. By providing knowledge of cannabis' broad ranging effects, we hope to enable better decision making regarding cannabis legislation and policy implementation.

Indexed as

Legislation, DrugScienceEndocannabinoidsHumansMarijuana AbuseMedical MarijuanaPlant ExtractsPublic PolicyEndocannabinoidsMedical MarijuanaPlant ExtractsCannabis effectsCannabis policyCannabis scienceMedicinal cannabis

Identifiers

PMID28189459
PMCPMC5404989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.