ArticleSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2019
[Medicinal cannabis and cannabis-based medication: an appeal to physicians, journalists, health insurances, and politicians for their responsible handling].
Article in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Three years of cannabis as medicine-preliminary results of the survey accompanying the prescription of medical cannabis in Germany].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021Article
- An Evaluation of Regulatory Regimes of Medical Cannabis: What Lessons Can Be Learned for the UK?Medical cannabis and cannabinoids · 2020Review
- [Cannabis-derived medicines for the treatment of chronic pain : Problems resulting from medical appraisals in the experience of the Medical Advisory Board of the Statutory Health Insurance Funds North].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the adoption of the law of March 6, 2017, any German physician can prescribe medical cannabis flowers and cannabis-based magistral and finished medicinal products. No specific indications for prescriptions are provided in the law. The statutory health insurance companies bear the costs once an application for cost coverage has been approved by the Medical Service of the Health Funds. The German associations of psychiatry (child, adolescents, and adults), neurology, palliative care, addictology, and pain medicine are watching these developments in the media, politics, and medical world with concern due to: the option to prescribe cannabis flowers despite the lack of sound evidence and against the recommendations of the German Medical Association; the lack of distinction between medical cannabis flowers and cannabis-based magistral and finished medical products; the indiscriminately positive reports on the efficacy of cannabis-based medicines for chronic pain and mental disorders; the attempts by the cannabis industry to influence physicians; the increase in potential indications by leaders of medical opinion paid by manufacturers of cannabis-based medicines. The medical associations make the following appeal to journalists: To report on the medical benefits and risks of cannabis-based medicines in a balanced manner. To physicians: to prescribe cannabis-based medicines with caution; to prefer magistral and finished medicinal products over cannabis flowers. To politicians: to consider data according to the standards of evidence-based medicine when making decisions and provide financial support for medical research into cannabis-based medicines.
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.