Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36072196›Full record

ReviewCureus2022

Interventions for Co-occurring Cannabis Use and Depression.

Tomoya Sato

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Tomoya SatoDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Saitama Medical University, Saitama, JPN.
University of Hawaii System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review aimed to investigate the effective intervention options for depression in patients with a history of cannabis use. The study eligibility criteria were as follows: English-language, peer-reviewed human studies; data not previously reported elsewhere; randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials comparing an intervention group and a control group, and single-group trials. In total, eight studies of interventions for patients with depression who reported cannabis use were identified. Four studies evaluated the effectiveness of the following three pharmacological interventions: extended quetiapine release, extended venlafaxine release, and fluoxetine. However, all studies failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of these drugs. Four studies evaluated the following psychological interventions: motivational interviewing (MI) and cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). These studies found that CBT may improve depression symptoms and cannabis dependence, and MI was associated with improvements in cannabis dependence. CBT and MI may be effective in improving depression and reducing cannabis use. However, the conclusions of this review are limited because of the small number of studies and their low quality. Higher-quality research is required to evaluate the effectiveness of CBT, MI, and other interventions for comorbid cannabis use and depression.

Indexed as

cannabis usedepressionmotivational interviewingrandomized controlled studysubstance abuse

Identifiers

PMID36072196
PMCPMC9438295
OpenAlexW4289545050

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.