ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2020
Perceptions of U.S. and Canadian Cannabis Package Warnings Among U.S. Adults.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Delta-8-THC warning labels on perceived intoxication, harm, and susceptibility among adolescents.The International journal on drug policy · 2025Trial
- Exploring the effects of cannabis health warnings on protective health intentions among US adults in legal recreational states.The International journal on drug policy · 2024Trial
- Perceptions of Cannabis Vaping Advertising Messages and Warnings Among US Young Adults.Substance use & addiction journal · 2026Article
- Knowledge about the health effects of cannabis before and after legalization of 'recreational' cannabis in Canada: findings from the International Cannabis Policy Study, 2018-2024.Journal of cannabis research · 2026Article
- Young Adults' Experiences with Cannabis Retailer Marketing and Related Practices: Differences Among Sociodemographic Groups and Associations with Cannabis Use-related Outcomes.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Cannabis Marketing Strategies in the United States: A Descriptive Analysis of Four Prominent Companies.Substance use & addiction journal · 2025Article
- Packaging of Cannabis Edibles, Health Warning Recall, and Perceptions Among Young Adults.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Neighborhood demographics in relation to marketing and regulation-related factors among cannabis retailers in 5 US cities.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2024Article
- Warning Labels as a Public Health Intervention: Effects and Challenges for Tobacco, Cannabis, and Opioid Medications.Annual review of public health · 2024Review
- A systematic review of cannabis health warning research.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Review
- Examining indirect effects of advertising exposure on young adults' cannabis and nicotine vaping.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2023Article
- The Impact of Cannabis Packaging Characteristics on Perceptions and Intentions.American journal of preventive medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCannabis warning labels can communicate risks, but there is little research on warning perceptions and differences by product type.
methodsIn a 2019 online survey, 1,000 U.S. adults (500 cannabis users and 500 cannabis non-users who used tobacco) were randomly assigned to view no warning or one of four U.S. or Canadian warnings displayed on images of packaging for dried flower or edible cannabis. The warnings described cannabis risks related to psychosis, addiction, lack of FDA oversight, and impaired driving. We used linear regression to examine perceptions of warnings and product harm as a function of product type (dried or edible) and warning. We examined which warning participants selected as most effective for discouraging youth use and impaired driving.
resultsParticipants found the addiction warning (cannabis users: B = -1.04, p < 0.001; cannabis non-users: B = 1.17, p < 0.001) and psychosis warning (users: B = -0.65, p < 0.05; non-users: B = -0.71, p < 0.05) less believable than the driving warning but indicated that they learned more from the psychosis warning than the driving warning (users: B = 0.88, p < 0.01; non-users (B = 1.60, p < 0.001). Participants viewing any warning considered smoking cannabis to be more harmful than those viewing no warning (all p < 0.05). The psychosis warning was most frequently selected as the best warning for discouraging youth use.
conclusionsWarnings have the potential to educate consumers and impact cannabis harm perceptions. Warnings have similar effects across product types, potentially eliminating the need for product type-specific warnings. The association of cannabis use with risk for psychosis, a topic addressed in Canadian warnings, could be a useful topic of focus in U.S. warnings.
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.