ArticleBMC medical education2024
Medical students' attitudes and perceived competence regarding medical cannabis and its suggestibility.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Healthcare students' knowledge and attitude toward medical cannabis: a cross-sectional study in southeastern Iran.Journal of cannabis research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Perceptions of Romanian Medical Students in a Cross-Sectional Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Rural reticence to inform physicians of cannabis use.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2025Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe global trend of legalizing medical cannabis (MC) is on the rise. In Germany, physicians have prescribed MC at the expense of health insurers since 2017. However, the teaching on MC has been scant in medical training. This study investigates medical students' attitudes and perceived competence regarding MC and evaluates how varying materials (videos/articles) impact their opinions.
methodsFourth-year medical students were invited to participate in the cross-sectional study. During an online session, students viewed a video featuring a patient with somatoform pain discussing her medical history, plus one of four randomly assigned MC-related materials (each an article and a video depicting a positive or negative perspective on MC). Students' opinions were measured at the beginning [T0] and the end of the course [T1] using a standardized questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale. We assessed the influence of the material on the students' opinions using paired-sample t-tests. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey post-hoc tests were conducted to compare the four groups. Pearson correlations assessed correlations.
results150 students participated in the course, the response rate being 75.3% [T0] and 72.7% [T1]. At T0, students felt a little competent regarding MC therapy (M = 1.80 ± 0.82). At T1, students in groups 1 (positive video) and 3 (positive article) rated themselves as more capable in managing MC therapy [Formula: see text], and students in groups 3 (positive article) and 4 (negative article) felt more skilled in treating patients with chronic pain [Formula: see text]. Compared to the other groups, group 2 students (negative video) felt significantly less competent. They perceived cannabis as addictive, hazardous and unsuitable for medical prescription. DISCUSSION: This study showed that medical students lack knowledge and perceived competence in MC therapy. Material influences their opinions in different ways, and they seek more training on MC. This underlines that integrating MC education into medical curricula is crucial to address this knowledge gap.
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.