ArticleJournal of cannabis research2025
Clinicians' attitudes and knowledge of medicinal cannabis in opioid dependence treatment clinics in New South Wales, Australia.
Article in Journal of cannabis research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are no prior studies investigating the attitudes and knowledge of opioid treatment program (OTP) clinicians on prescribed medicinal cannabis in OTP clients. This study examined the OTP clinicians' medicinal cannabis experience, knowledge, concerns, and educational needs.
methodsStaff from six public OTP services in New South Wales completed a medicinal cannabis survey. Staff included nurses, doctors, pharmacists, allied health, and consumer workers. Single-level regression models were used to estimate participants' sex, role, and year of experience effect.
results102 (63%) clinicians responded to the medicinal cannabis part of the survey, mostly female (n = 58, 56.9%), and more than half worked full-time (n = 54, 52.9%). Most of the participants (88.5%, 85/96) lacked experience providing medicinal cannabis, two in three (66.7%, 68/102) agreed to consider medicinal cannabis as a treatment for addressing cannabis use in OTP clients. Over 70% (71.5%, 73/102) expressed similar agreement to consider medicinal cannabis for other health conditions in OTP clients. More than half of the clinicians (54.2%, 52/96) expressed a lack of confidence in assisting clients with accessing medicinal cannabis, and were unfamiliar with current regulations (56.2%, 54/96). Clinicians expressed safety concerns regarding side effects such as driving-related problems (74%, 71/96), cognitive impairment (54.2%, 52/96), and cannabis dependence (54.2%, 52/96). The three conditions most endorsed as having sufficient evidence to support the use of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-based medicinal cannabis were palliative care symptom management (72.4%, 71/98), chronic pain (67.4%, 66/98), and multiple sclerosis (43.8%, 43/98). The three conditions most identified as having sufficient evidence to support the routine clinical use of cannabidiol (CBD)-based medicinal cannabis were chronic pain (64.9%, 63/97), palliative care (62.5%, 60/96), and sleep problems (44.8%, 43/96). The most common educational needs identified by participants were the evidence for the effectiveness of medicinal cannabis in cannabis dependence treatment (88.5%, 85/96), other health conditions (87.5%, 84/96), and indications and contraindications for using medicinal cannabis (87.5%, 84/96).
conclusionDespite the interest in using medicinal cannabis for treating cannabis dependence and /or other health conditions, clinicians identified several barriers including limited experience, lack of confidence, and poor understanding of the regulatory framework.
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.