ArticleJournal of cannabis research2021
Cannabis against chronic musculoskeletal pain: a scoping review on users and their perceptions.
Article in Journal of cannabis research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- The theory of planned behavior partly explains why adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain consider using medical cannabis for pain management.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- From farm to bedside: Potential of medical cannabis in global health.Complementary therapies in medicine · 2025Review
- Discontinuation rates and predictors of Medical Cannabis cessation for chronic musculoskeletal pain.PloS one · 2025Article
- The Elusive Truth of Cannabinoids for Rheumatic Pain.Current rheumatology reports · 2024Review
- Review
- Factors associated with the use of cannabis for self-medication by adults: data from the French TEMPO cohort study.Journal of cannabis research · 2024Article
- Perceptions and engagement of patients with chronic conditions on the use of medical cannabis: a scoping review.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Perceptions in orthopedic surgery on the use of cannabis in treating pain: a survey of patients with spine pain (POSIT Spine).Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Experiences and Perceptions of Medical Cannabis among People Living with Chronic Pain and Community Pharmacists: A Qualitative Study in Canada.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2023Article
- Pain Medications Used by Persons Living With Fibromyalgia: A Comparison Between the Profile of a Quebec Sample and Clinical Practice Guidelines.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2023Article
- The role of personality traits on self-medicated cannabis in rheumatoid arthritis patients: A multivariable analysis.PloS one · 2023Article
- Perceptions and Preoccupations of Patients and Physicians Regarding Use of Medical Cannabis as an Intervention Against Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Results from a Qualitative Study.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Prevalence of cannabis use for pain management in Quebec: A post-legalization estimate among generations living with chronic pain.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 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
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) may lead to reduced physical function and is the most common cause of chronic non-cancer pain. Currently, the pharmacotherapeutic options against CMP are limited and frequently consist of pain management with non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, gabapentinoids, or opioids, which carry major adverse effects. Although the effectiveness of medical cannabis (MC) for CMP still lacks solid evidence, several patients suffering from it are exploring this therapeutic option with their physicians.
objectivesLittle is known about patients' perceptions of their MC treatment for CMP. We aimed to increase this knowledge, useful for healthcare professionals and patients considering this treatment, by conducting a scoping literature review, following guidance by Arksey and O'Malley, to describe the views and perceptions of adult patients who had consumed MC to relieve chronic CMP.
methodsDatabases (PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science) and websites were searched using combinations of controlled and free vocabulary. All studies and study designs reporting on patients' perceptions regarding MC against CMP were considered. Studies had to include adult patients reporting qualitatively or quantitatively, i.e., through questionnaires, on MC use to treat CMP or other non-cancer pain, since studies reporting exclusively on perceptions regarding CMP were very rare. Study characteristics were extracted and limitations of the study quality were assessed. The review includes patients' demographic characteristics, patterns of MC use, perceived positive and negative effects, use of alcohol or other drugs, reported barriers to CM use, and funding sources of the studies.
resultsParticipants of the 49 included studies reported that MC use helped them to reduce CMP and other chronic non-cancer pain, with only minor adverse effects, and some reported improved psychological well-being. In the included studies, men represent between 18 and 88% of the subjects. The mean age of participants in these studies (42/49) varied between 28.4 and 62.8 years old. The most common route of administration is inhalation.
conclusionMC users suffering from CMP or other chronic non-cancer pain perceived more benefits than harms. However, the information from these studies has several methodological limitations and results are exploratory. These user-reported experiences must thus be examined by well-designed and methodologically sound clinical or observational studies, particularly regarding CMP, where reports are very scarce.
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.