ArticleAmerican journal of public health2019
Conflict of Interest Provisions in State Laws Governing Medical and Adult Use Cannabis.
Article in American journal of public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing barriers to community engagement on cannabis policy: baseline survey of behavioral and public health professionals in California.Translational behavioral medicine · 2025Article
- Local Laws Regulating Cannabis in California Two Years Post Legalization: Assessing Incorporation of Lessons from Tobacco Control.Cannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.) · 2022Article
- Public interest in Cannabis during election season: a Google Trends analysis.Journal of cannabis research · 2020Article
- Assessment of Incorporation of Lessons From Tobacco Control in City and County Laws Regulating Legal Marijuana in California.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Population pharmacokinetic modeling of plasma Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and an active and inactive metabolite following controlled smoked cannabis administration.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
- Civic Engagement in California Cannabis Policy Development.Journal of psychoactive drugsArticle
- Public Health and Medicine's Need to Respond to Cannabis Commercialization in the United States: A Commentary.Journal of psychoactive drugsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although the acceleration of cannabis legalization in the United States has spurred innovations in public administration and policymaking, there have been news accounts of public employees engaged in cannabis licensure or enforcement that constitute conflicts of interest (COIs). After conducting 3 surveys in 50 states (including Washington, DC as a state), we found that COI provisions pertaining to cannabis-related public employment fell into 2 categories: subject matter general and cannabis specific. Only 20% (6/30) of the states that legalized medical cannabis had COI provisions in their medical cannabis codes, whereas the remaining 80% rely on subject matter general provisions relating to all areas of regulated subject matter, highlighting the need for thoughtful creation of COI rules in future policymaking. By contrast, 88% (7/8) of states that have legalized adult use cannabis put their COI provisions directly in their cannabis codes or regulations. Governments should enact cannabis-specific COI policies applicable to broadly defined categories of public employees that are responsive to the unique context of bringing cannabis from the black market into the regulated market.
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.