ArticleBMC family practice2019
Indications and administration practices amongst medical cannabis healthcare providers: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMC family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) Before Bedtime: Feasibility and Mechanistic Pilot Study on Sleep and Cardiac Autonomic Activity.Journal of sleep research · 2026Article
- Associations of cannabis, alcohol, and tobacco use combinations with sleep health.Addictive behaviors reports · 2026Article
- Patterns and factors among oncology fellows recommending medical cannabis to adults with cancer.Journal of cannabis research · 2025Article
- Public understanding of medical cannabis in Poland 7 years after legalization: findings from a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Physicians' Attitudes and Practices Regarding Cannabis and Recommending Medical Cannabis Use.Cannabis and cannabinoid research · 2024Article
- Integrated transcriptome and cell phenotype analysis suggest involvement of PARP1 cleavage, Hippo/Wnt, TGF-β and MAPK signaling pathways in ovarian cancer cells response to cannabis and PARP1 inhibitor treatment.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Attitudes and Knowledge Regarding the Therapeutic Use of Cannabinoids among Community Pharmacists: A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study in Amman, Jordan.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- State Variation in U.S. Medical Cannabis Limits, Restrictions, and Therapeutic Cannabis Dosing.Cannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.) · 2023Article
- Phytocannabinoid Compositions from Cannabis Act Synergistically with PARP1 Inhibitor against Ovarian Cancer Cells In Vitro and Affect the Wnt Signaling Pathway.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Tobacco/nicotine use among individuals using cannabis for therapeutic purposes.The American journal on addictions · 2022Article
- The association between cannabis and codeine use: a nationally representative cross-sectional study in Canada.Journal of cannabis research · 2022Article
- Anti-Cancer Activity ofCancers · 2022Review
- Cannabis Biomolecule Effects on Cancer Cells and Cancer Stem Cells: Cytotoxic, Anti-Proliferative, and Anti-Migratory Activities.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Routes of administration, reasons for use, and approved indications of medical cannabis in oncology: a scoping review.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Article
- Specific Compositions ofCancers · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe medical use of cannabis has been legislatively restricted for decades in the US and abroad. In recent years, changing local and national policies have given rise to a community of healthcare providers who may be recommending the medical use of cannabis without the benefit of formal clinical practice guidelines or sufficient training and education. In addition, a citizen science movement has emerged whereby unlicensed and untrained individuals are acting as healthcare provider proxies, offering cannabis-specific clinical care to "patients". This study sought to characterize the clinical practice characteristics of these provider groups.
methodsAn anonymous, online survey was designed to describe levels of cannabis-specific education, practice characteristics, indications for medical use, dose, administration forms and adverse effects related to cannabis use. The questionnaire was disseminated via professional medical cannabis associations and by word-of-mouth. It was accessed between June 31-December 31, 2018. A self-selecting sample of respondents (n = 171) completed the survey.
resultsFormal education or training in the medical use of cannabis was significantly more common among licensed respondents than unlicensed respondents (95.5% vs 76.9% respectively, OR, 6.3, 95% CI, 1.2-32.3, p = 0.03). The vast majority (n = 74, 83.15%) of licensed respondents reported having recommended cannabis as an adjunct to an existing prescription drug. Almost two-thirds (n = 64, 71.9%) reported having recommended it as a substitute. When delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the principal therapeutic constituent of interest, vaporization is the most common method of administration recommended (n = 94 responses, 71.4% of respondents). In contrast, when cannabidiol (CBD) is the principal therapeutic constituent of interest, oral administration (sublingual or oromucosal absorption) is the most common method (n = 70 responses, 71.4% of respondents).
conclusionsIndividuals who recommend the medical use of cannabis appear to be self-generating a community standard of practice in the absence of formal clinical guidelines on dosing, interactions and other characteristics. Reducing barriers to clinical research on cannabis products is needed, not only to better understand their risks and benefits, but also to augment the evidence-base for informing clinical practice.
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.