ReviewInternational review of psychiatry (Abingdon, England)2018
Sweet flowers are slow, and weeds make haste: leveraging methodology from research on tobacco, alcohol, and opioid analgesics to make rapid and policy-relevant advances in cannabis science.
Review in International review of psychiatry (Abingdon, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pain, Depression, and Functional Outcomes Among Older Adults Who Use Cannabis or Opioid Analgesics for Chronic Pain Conditions.Clinical gerontologistObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The legalization of medical and recreational cannabis use has occurred ahead of science. The current evidence base has poor utility for determining if cannabis products can meet the standards of safety, efficacy, and quality intrinsic to modern medicine, and for informing regulation of cannabis as a legal intoxicant. Individual jurisdictions that pass cannabis reforms may not have adequate resources to support the level of new scientific research needed to inform regulatory actions; this could make it difficult to keep a rapidly growing multi-billion-dollar cannabis industry in check. Further, the present lack of evidence-based regulatory oversight for cannabis parallels the climates that gave rise to the tobacco and prescription opioid epidemics, suggesting that continued omission may result in negative public health consequences. However, translating a methodological framework developed through research on these compounds may promote rapid advances in cannabis science germane to regulatory knowledge gaps. The present review highlights specific advancements in these areas, as well as in alcohol regulation, that are prime for informing policy-relevant cannabis science, and also offers some recommendations for evidence-based regulatory policy. Resulting progress may directly inform both regulation of cannabis in both medical and licit recreational drug frameworks, and new cannabis-related public health initiatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.