Trial reportClinical chemistry2023
Driving Under the Influence of Cannabis: Impact of Combining Toxicology Testing with Field Sobriety Tests.
Trial report in Clinical chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol detection times using mass spectroscopy in oral fluid: a systematic review using a 5 ng/mL cut-off value.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Association of driving with blood delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol: a systematic review.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Comment on Deeb et al.: interpretation of breath cannabinoids and implications for impairment.Journal of analytical toxicology · 2026Article
- Driving by frequent cannabis users 'the morning after' last use of smoked cannabis: an observational driving simulator study.Journal of cannabis research · 2026Article
- Effects of naturalistic doses of cannabis edibles on cognition and association with blood THC.Psychopharmacology · 2026Observational
- Recent Advances in the Science of Cannabis-Impaired Driving.Current addiction reports · 2026Review
- Per Se Driving Under the Influence of Cannabis Statutes and Blood Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Concentrations following Short-Term Cannabis Abstinence.Clinical chemistry · 2025Article
- Accidental cannabis intoxication in two young children: clinical presentation and toxicokinetics - a case series.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Acute cannabis intoxication among the paediatric population.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Review
- The Impact of Adult Cannabis Use Legalization in California: A Qualitative Review of Subject Matter Expert Opinions on Proposition 64.Cannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.) · 2025Article
- Cannabinoids for treating psychiatric disorders in youth: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2024Review
- Cannabinoids detected in exhaled breath condensate after cannabis use.Journal of breath research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCannabis is increasingly used both medically and recreationally. With widespread use, there is growing concern about how to identify cannabis-impaired drivers.
methodsA placebo-controlled randomized double-blinded protocol was conducted to study the effects of cannabis on driving performance. One hundred ninety-one participants were randomized to smoke ad libitum a cannabis cigarette containing placebo or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) (5.9% or 13.4%). Blood, oral fluid (OF), and breath samples were collected along with longitudinal driving performance on a simulator (standard deviation of lateral position [SDLP] and car following [coherence]) over a 5-hour period. Law enforcement officers performed field sobriety tests (FSTs) to determine if participants were impaired.
resultsThere was no relationship between THC concentrations measured in blood, OF, or breath and SDLP or coherence at any of the timepoints studied (P > 0.05). FSTs were significant (P < 0.05) for classifying participants into the THC group vs the placebo group up to 188 minutes after smoking. Seventy-one minutes after smoking, FSTs classified 81% of the participants who received active drug as being impaired. However, 49% of participants who smoked placebo (controls) were also deemed impaired at this same timepoint. Combining a 2 ng/mL THC cutoff in OF with positive findings on FSTs reduced the number of controls classified as impaired to zero, 86 minutes after smoking the placebo.
conclusionsRequiring a positive toxicology result in addition to the FST observations substantially improved the classification accuracy regarding possible driving under the influence of THC by decreasing the percentage of controls classified as impaired.
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.