Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34676342›Full record

ReviewMedical cannabis and cannabinoids2020

An Evaluation of Regulatory Regimes of Medical Cannabis: What Lessons Can Be Learned for the UK?

Anne Katrin Schlag

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical cannabis and cannabinoids, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Cannabis and psychosis: minimising harm while maximising therapeutic potential.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Medicinal cannabis - has it found a place in palliative care?Palliative care and social practice · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Perceived Stigma of Patients Undergoing Treatment with Cannabis-Based Medicinal Products.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  18. Review
  19. UnderstandingPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Anne Katrin SchlagDrug Science, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper evaluates current regulatory regimes of medical cannabis using peer-reviewed and grey literature as well as personal communications. Despite the legalization of medical cannabis in the UK in November 2018, patients still lack access to the medicine, with fewer than 10 NHS prescriptions having been written to date. We look at six countries that have been at the forefront of prescribing medical cannabis, including case studies of the three largest medical cannabis markets in the EU: Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands. Canada, Israel and Australia add global examples. These countries have a more successful history of prescribing medical cannabis than the UK. Their legislations are outlined and numbers of medical cannabis prescriptions are provided to give an indication of how successful their regulatory regime has been in providing patient access. Evaluating countries' medical cannabis regulations allows us to offer implications for lessons to be learned for the development of a successful medical cannabis regime in the UK.

Indexed as

LegislationMedical cannabisPatient accessRegulation

Identifiers

PMID34676342
PMCPMC8489334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.