ArticleJournal of cannabis research2023
Potency and safety analysis of hemp delta-9 products: the hemp vs. cannabis demarcation problem.
Article in Journal of cannabis research, 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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Industrial and Therapeutic Applications of Hemp: A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Optimization, Kinetics, and Thermodynamics of Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction of Phytochemicals from Hemp.ACS omega · 2025Article
- The resurgence of synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists as adulterants in the Era of Cannabis legalization: Lessons from prior epidemics and clinical implications.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2025Review
- Introduction to the special issue: the two sides of hemp: medical and industrial.Journal of cannabis research · 2024Article
- Article
- Compliance Testing of Hemp (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Correction: Potency and safety analysis of hemp delta-9 products: the hemp vs. cannabis demarcation problem.Journal of cannabis research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHemp-derived delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (∆
methodsFifty-three ∆
resultsWhile 96.2% of products were under the legal ∆9 THC limit, 66.0% differed from their stated dosage by more than 10%, and although 84.9% provided a lab report to customers, 71.1% of these did not check for impurities. Additionally, 49% of products converted CBD to THC to achieve their levels, and only 15.1% performed age verification at checkout.
conclusionsDespite some positive findings, the results show that hemp ∆
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.