Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38931356›Full record

ReviewPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Herbal Cannabis and Depression: A Review of Findings Published over the Last Three Years.

Jozsef Haller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Cannabinoids: Medicine or PoisonBalkan medical journal · 2025
    Article
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.

Jozsef HallerDrug Research Institute, 1137 Budapest, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0003-4315-3026

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public perception contrasts scientific findings on the depression-related effects of cannabis. However, earlier studies were performed when cannabis was predominantly illegal, its production was mostly uncontrolled, and the idea of medical cannabis was incipient only. We hypothesized that recent changes in attitudes and legislations may have favorably affected research. In addition, publication bias against cannabis may have also decreased. To investigate this hypothesis, we conducted a review of research studies published over the last three years. We found 156 relevant research articles. In most cross-sectional studies, depression was higher in those who consumed cannabis than in those who did not. An increase in cannabis consumption was typically followed by an increase in depression, whereas withdrawal from cannabis ameliorated depression in most cases. Although medical cannabis reduced depression in most studies, none of these were placebo-controlled. In clinical studies published in the same period, the placebo also ameliorated depression and, in addition, the average effect size of the placebo was larger than the average effect size of medical cannabis. We also investigated the plausibility of the antidepressant effects of cannabis by reviewing molecular and pharmacological studies. Taken together, the reviewed findings do not support the antidepressant effects of herbal cannabis.

Indexed as

depressionherbal cannabispharmacological plausibility

Identifiers

PMID38931356
PMCPMC11206863

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.