ArticleActa psychiatrica Scandinavica2026
Comparative Clinical Trajectories Across Cannabis-Related and Nonsubstance-Related Psychoses.
Article in Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica, 2026. 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.
- Stimulant-induced psychosis requires the same clinical priority as other psychotic disorders.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch indicates that first-episode psychosis (FEP) with cannabis use disorder (CUD) carries a substantial disease burden, but more granular clinical trajectories of cannabis-related psychoses remain unclear. This study examines the clinical trajectories of first clinically diagnosed FEP&CUD and cannabis-induced psychosis (CIP) in comparison with FEP without substance use disorder (SUD).
methodsFrom the linkage of nationwide administrative and medical registers of Sweden (2006-2021), we identified 1772 individuals (84.1% men) with incident CIP, 1360 individuals (84.3% men) with FEP&CUD and matched individuals with FEP but without SUD and followed them up until 2023. We compared annual prevalence of psychiatric diagnoses before and after cohort entry, medication use, days in inpatient care, and the risks of hospitalization for psychosis and death.
resultsMean age at first diagnosis was 26.6 years (SD 8.3) for incident CIP and 26.9 years (SD 8.4) for FEP&CUD and FEP without SUD. Individuals in the FEP without SUD cohort were more likely to have a record of schizophrenia diagnosis compared to the FEP&CUD and CIP cohorts during the first (14.41%, 6.25%, 2.37%) and second year (10.88%, 7.13%, 3.27%) after cohort entry. However, FEP&CUD and CIP cohorts had a more pronounced burden of inpatient treatment as well as elevated risks of hospitalization for psychosis (aHR = 1.66; 95% CI 1.49-1.86 and aHR = 1.47; 1.32-1.64) and death (aHR = 2.02; 1.44-2.82 and aHR = 1.80; 1.30-2.50) compared to individuals with FEP without SUD.
conclusionsCannabis-related psychoses, that is, FEP&CUD and CIP, were associated with poor outcomes, including high risk of hospitalization for psychosis and increased mortality, underscoring the need for targeted interventions. Moreover, the overlapping clinical trajectories suggest that cannabis-related psychoses may not represent clinically distinct entities but instead lie on a continuum.
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.