Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35329806›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Clinical Evidence of Cannabinoids in Migraine: A Narrative Review.

Flavia Lo Castro, Carlo Baraldi, Lanfranco Pellesi, Simona Guerzoni

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. The role of androgens in migraine pathophysiology.Neurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.)
    Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Flavia Lo CastroDepartment of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, Post-Graduate School in Pharmacology and Clinical Toxicology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, 41122 Modena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8572-3421
Carlo BaraldiDepartment of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, PhD School in Neurosciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, 41122 Modena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8432-1888
Lanfranco PellesiDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Danish Headache Center, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Simona GuerzoniDepartment of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, Medical Toxicology, Headache and Drug Abuse Research Center, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, 41124 Modena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9589-2782
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The endocannabinoid system (ECS) influences many biological functions, and hence, its pharmacological modulation may be useful for several disorders, such as migraine. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that the ECS is involved in the modulation of trigeminal excitability. Additionally, clinical data have suggested that an endocannabinoid deficiency is associated with migraine. Given these data, phytocannabinoids, as well as synthetic cannabinoids, have been tried as migraine treatments. In this narrative review, the current clinical evidence of potential ECS involvement in migraine pathogenesis is summarized. Furthermore, studies exploring the clinical effects of phytocannabinoids and synthetic cannabinoids on migraine patients are reviewed.

Indexed as

cannabidiolcannabisendocannabinoid systemheadachemigraineΔ9-tetrahydrocannabinol

Identifiers

PMID35329806
PMCPMC8949974
OpenAlexW4220724046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.