ReviewActa neurologica Belgica2026
Therapeutic effects of cannabinoids on Parkinson's disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Acta neurologica Belgica, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurrent treatments for Parkinson's disease (PD) are primarily symptomatic and may lead to motor fluctuations and levodopa-induced dyskinesia over time, highlighting the need to repurpose other medications. Cannabinoids have gained attention as potential repurposed treatments. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated their efficacy in PD while addressing limitations of previous reviews, including low statistical power and inclusion of cannabinoid antagonists in pooled analyses.
methodsA literature search was conducted through PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of cannabinoids in PD. Quality assessment was done via RoB-2. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed using the meta and metafor packages in R, with mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD; Hedges' g) reported with 95% confidence interval (CI). A sensitivity analysis was carried out to assess the robustness of our findings. In crossover trials, effect sizes and standard errors were extrapolated from the reported CIs, considering the paired design.
resultsEleven RCTs were identified, six of which were eligible for meta-analysis due to the absence of poolable outcomes in the remainder. Cannabinoids did not significantly improve PD severity (SMD = 0.16, 95% CI[-0.13 to 0.44], p = 0.27, I²=0%), motor examination (SMD=-0.08, 95% CI[-0.35 to 0.20], p = 0.57, I²=0%), motor experiences of daily living (SMD=-0.08, 95% CI[-0.49 to 0.33], p = 0.71, I²=0%), non-motor symptoms (SMD= -0.03, 95% CI[-0.72 to 0.67], p = 0.94, I²= 64.3%). Sensitivity analysis excluding Peball et al. showed that the pooled estimate of non-motor symptoms was largely driven by nabilone (SMD = 0.34, 95%CI [-0.19 to 0.88], p = 0.21, I²=0%), suggesting a drug-specific benefit signal.
conclusionCannabinoids have not shown significant benefit in PD; however, our findings should be interpreted with caution. The nabilone benefit signal for non-motor symptoms represents a distinct question warranting dedicated trials. Future studies should use standardized, pharmacologically stratified protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42138778What 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.