Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35588111›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

The phytochemical diversity of commercial Cannabis in the United States.

Christiana J Smith, Daniela Vergara, Brian Keegan, Nick Jikomes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors.

Christiana J SmithIndependent Researcher, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Daniela VergaraDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, United States of America.
Brian KeeganDepartment of Information Science, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, United States of America.
Nick JikomesDepartment of Science and Innovation, Leafly Holdings Inc, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9834-2572

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The legal status of Cannabis is changing, fueling an increasing diversity of Cannabis-derived products. Because Cannabis contains dozens of chemical compounds with potential psychoactive or medicinal effects, understanding this phytochemical diversity is crucial. The legal Cannabis industry heavily markets products to consumers based on widely used labeling systems purported to predict the effects of different "strains." We analyzed the cannabinoid and terpene content of commercial Cannabis samples across six US states, finding distinct chemical phenotypes (chemotypes) which are reliably present. By comparing the observed phytochemical diversity to the commercial labels commonly attached to Cannabis-derived product samples, we show that commercial labels do not consistently align with the observed chemical diversity. However, certain labels do show a biased association with specific chemotypes. These results have implications for the classification of commercial Cannabis, design of animal and human research, and regulation of consumer marketing-areas which today are often divorced from the chemical reality of the Cannabis-derived material they wish to represent.

Indexed as

CannabinoidsCannabisHallucinogensAnalgesicsCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsMarketingPhytochemicalsUnited StatesAnalgesicsCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsCannabinoidsHallucinogensPhytochemicals

Identifiers

PMID35588111
PMCPMC9119530

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.