ArticleJournal of cannabis research2025
"It's legal, now what?" development, implementation, and evaluation of interdisciplinary cannabis education for healthcare trainees.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitudes, and concerns about medical cannabis among U.S. healthcare professionals.Journal of cannabis research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare professionals are motivated to improve their cannabis knowledge-yet few training opportunities exist. The unique legal status of cannabis, lack of rigorous research, and rapid expansion of consumer demand present challenges to the development and implementation of cannabis education for healthcare professionals and trainees. As a result, an alarming gap in quality of care is developing: health care professionals across disciplines lack the knowledge needed to counsel their patients, even as cannabis use rapidly accelerates.
methodsWe aimed to address the gap by developing and implementing an interprofessional cannabis training for healthcare trainees. Considering the challenges to development and implementation of cannabis training, we identified 4 implementation strategies to maximize training quality, uptake, and utility: 1) incorporating a diverse array of scientific expertise and perspectives in curriculum development; 2) offering a comprehensive, evidence-based treatment of potential risks and potential benefits; 3) using an interprofessional training format; 4) adopting a person-centered lens with special emphasis on patient-provider communication. A post-survey evaluated implementation success and intermediate outcomes in trainee attitudes and behavioral intentions that would suggest high potential to deliver healthcare improvements at scale.
resultsThe virtual training "It's Legal, Now What? Cannabis Epidemiology, Treatment, and Safety Recommendations" was successfully implemented; since 2023 a total of 345 trainees in Pharmacy, Nursing, Public Health, and Medicine have earned certificates. Evaluation results are encouraging: 90% agree the training addressed a training need in their current role, 83% agree it should be required for trainees in their profession, 98% and 96% agree it comprehensively addressed potential risks and benefits, respectively, 94% agree it was inclusive of diverse perspectives, 94% agree it improved their knowledge of community resources, 96% report improved ability to respond to patients interested in cannabis, 96% report greater likelihood of providing information on cannabis to others, and 97% of trainees agree they learned information that would help them in their work or community.
conclusionsWe present our training development process, implementation strategy, and evaluation as an adaptable model for contexts where both recreational and medical use of cannabis are legal.
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.