ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2021
Medical cannabis authorization and the risk of cardiovascular events: a longitudinal cohort study.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 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
- The relationship between cannabis and cardiovascular disease: clearing the haze.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2025Review
- Regular cannabis smoking and carotid artery calcification in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA).Vascular medicine (London, England) · 2024Article
- Prevalence, Perceptions, and Patterns of Cannabis Use Among Cardiac Inpatients at a Tertiary-Care Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Survey.CJC open · 2023Article
- Cannabis and adverse cardiovascular events: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.Toxicology reports · 2023Article
- Why Do Marijuana and Synthetic Cannabimimetics Induce Acute Myocardial Infarction in Healthy Young People?Cells · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCannabis is increasingly used for therapeutic purpose. However, its safety profile is not well known. This study assessed the risk of cardiovascular-related emergency department (ED) visit and hospitalization in adult patients authorized to use medical cannabis in Ontario, Canada from 2014 to 2017.
methodsThis is a longitudinal cohort study of patients who received medical cannabis authorization and followed-up in cannabis clinics, matched to population-based controls. The primary outcome was an ED visit or hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or stroke; and secondary outcome was for any cardiovascular event. Conditional Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the association between cannabis authorization and risk.
results18,653 cannabis patients were matched to 51,243 controls. During a median follow-up of 242 days, the incidence rates for ACS or stroke were 7.19/1000 person-years and 5.67/1000 person-years in the cannabis and controls group, respectively- adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 1.44 (95% CI 1.08-1.93). When stratified by sex, the association was only statistically significant among males: aHR 1.77 (1.23-2.56). For the secondary outcome (any CV events), the aHR was 1.47 (1.26-1.72). The aHR among males and females were 1.52 (1.24-1.86) and 1.41 (1.11-1.79), respectively. Tested interaction between cannabis authorization and sex was not significant (p > 0.05).
conclusionsMedical cannabis authorization was associated with an increased risk of ED visits or hospitalization for CV events including stroke and ACS.
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.