ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2022
Sources of Cannabis Information and Medical Guidance for Neurologic Use: NARCOMS Survey of People Living With Multiple Sclerosis.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2022. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- "It's legal, now what?" development, implementation, and evaluation of interdisciplinary cannabis education for healthcare trainees.Journal of cannabis research · 2025Article
- Budtender Perceptions and Knowledge of Cannabis and Mental Health: A Preliminary Study.Cannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.) · 2025Article
- Clinical Benefits and Safety of Medical Cannabis Products: A Narrative Review on Natural Extracts.Pain and therapy · 2024Review
- Acceptability of and attitudes to the therapeutic use of cannabis and cannabidiol in people with Parkinson's disease: A French survey.Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders · 2024Article
- Article
- The quality of health information provided on web sites selling cannabis to consumers in Canada is poor.Harm reduction journal · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: As cannabis products become increasingly accessible across the United States, understanding how patients obtain medical information on cannabis and view the role of their health care provider in providing information is important. Methods: Participants with multiple sclerosis (MS) from the North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis registry completed a supplemental survey on Δ Results: Overall, 3,249 participants responded (47% response rate), of whom 31% ever used cannabis and 20% currently used cannabis for MS. To determine presumed cannabis contents, respondents who had ever used cannabis (ever users) most often used dispensary-provided information (39%), word of mouth/dealer/friend (29%), and unregulated product labels (24%). For general information on cannabis for MS, ever users most often used dispensary staff (38%) and friends (32%). The primary source of medical guidance among ever users was most often "nobody or myself" (48%), followed by a dispensary professional (21%); only 12% relied on their MS physician, although 70% had discussed cannabis with their MS physician. Most current users (62%) typically sourced their cannabis from a dispensary. The most common factor in selecting a cannabis product was perceived quality and safety (70%). Discussion: Participants most often received information on cannabis for MS from dispensaries, unregulated product labels, and friends; only a small proportion used health care providers. Evidence-based patient and physician education is needed.
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.