ArticleToxicology reports2023
Cannabis and adverse cardiovascular events: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
Article in Toxicology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cannabis Use Before or During Pregnancy and Subsequent Cardiovascular Disease Risk.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Papillary Muscle Rupture and Cardiogenic Shock Requiring ECMO Support in a Patient with Bipolar Disorder and Chronic Cannabis Use.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Rare but relevant: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2025Review
- Emerging risk factors for heart failure in younger populations: A growing public health concern.World journal of cardiology · 2025Review
- Review
- Pre-pregnancy substance use and first trimester cardiovascular health among nulliparous pregnant people: The nuMoM2b Study.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2024Article
- Cannabis Use Variations and Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cannabis is the most used illicit drug in the world. Global trends of decriminalization and legalization of cannabis lead to various forms of cannabis use and bring great concerns over adverse events, particularly in the cardiovascular (CV) system. To date, the association between cannabis and adverse CV events is still controversial. Purpose: We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the adverse CV events from cannabis use. Patients and methods: A systematic search for publications describing the adverse CV events of cannabis use, including acute myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke, was performed via PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Data on effect estimates in individual studies were extracted and combined via random-effects meta-analysis using the DerSimonian and Laird method, a generic inverse-variance strategy. Results: Twenty studies with a total of 183,410,651 patients were included. The proportion of males was 23.7%. The median age and follow-up time were 42.4 years old (IQR: 37.4, 50.0) and 6.2 years (IQR: 1.7, 27.7), respectively. The prevalence of cannabis use was 1.9%. Cannabis use was not significantly associated with acute MI (pooled odds ratio (OR): 1.29; 95%CI: 0.80, 2.08), stroke (pooled OR 1.35; 95%CI: 0.74, 2.47), and adverse CV events (pooled OR: 1.47; 95%CI: 0.98, 2.20). Conclusion: The risk of adverse CV events including acute MI and stroke does not exhibit a significant increase with cannabis exposure. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting the findings due to the heterogeneity of the studies.
Indexed as
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.