SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
Neuropsychological effects of cannabis use by continent and age: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cannabis use during adolescence and young adulthood has been associated with neurocognitive alterations. However, limited attention has been paid to whether these findings vary according to developmental stage and regional context. This systematic review examined the neurocognitive effects of cannabis use in adolescents and young adults, with particular attention to age-related patterns and geographic variation. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and OpenGrey for studies published between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2024. Eligible studies assessed cognitive performance in adolescent or young adult cannabis users. Methodological quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and certainty in the body of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Across the included studies, memory-related impairments were the most consistent findings, particularly in episodic and working memory. Evidence regarding executive functions was more heterogeneous and appeared to vary according to age group, exposure profile, study design, and cognitive task. Studies from the Americas, many of them longitudinal, more often reported negative associations between cannabis use and cognitive performance. European findings were more mixed, possibly reflecting differences in product characteristics, co-use patterns, and measurement approaches. Evidence from Asia was limited. Discussion: Overall, the findings suggest that cannabis-related neurocognitive differences are more consistently detected in adolescent samples than in young-adult samples, although this pattern is likely shaped by developmental, methodological, and contextual factors. Future research should improve comparability in exposure definitions, control of confounding variables, and selection of cognitive measures.
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.