ArticleSpartan medical research journal2017
Medical Marijuana and the Treatment of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder: A Survey of Michigan Psychiatrists' Opinions.
Article in Spartan medical research journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextAlthough recent studies have indicated a potential mechanism of action through which medical marijuana (MM) and its derivatives may treat Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms, definitive evidence is still lacking. Few studies concerning physician attitudes regarding MM and/or marijuana-derived medications for PTSD are found in the psychiatric literature.
methodsA non-probability convenience sample of psychiatric physicians in Michigan was surveyed during 2016. The 12-item survey questionnaire asked respondents a series of questions about their personal characteristics, prior experiences of treating PTSD and opinions concerning the use/potential use of MM for treatment of PTSD.
resultsA total of 83 psychiatrists (11.7% of total invited) responded to the survey. Several statistically significant correlations between respondent characteristics and other key measures (e.g., Age Category, Gender, Years of Psychiatric Practice, Psychiatric Practice Role (i.e., resident vs. attending), Number of Psychiatric Subspecialties, and Number of PTSD Patients Diagnosed and/or Treated to date) were found. A composite summary score was also formulated from questions related to opinion regarding the use of MM for PTSD and categorized into three comparison groups. The final stepwise multinomial logistic model demonstrated three statistically significant factors influencing what response category respondents fell into regarding MM use for PTSD: a) how often respondents had been exposed to recommendations concerning the use of MM for PTSD (p < 0.001), b) Age Category (p = 0.001) and how frequently respondents had recommended MM for treatment of PTSD (p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe results from this smaller sample indicate that the majority of psychiatrist respondents did not support MM for the treatment of PTSD. Judging from these results, Michigan psychiatrists may be extremely conservative regard the prospective use of MM for PTSD. Few sample respondents indicated that they had been exposed to professional literature detailing MM and derivatives as a treatment for PTSD. Most respondents also indicated that they were
Indexed as
Identifiers
33655102PMC7745840W3132095312What 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.