Evidence mapPaperPMID 36848191Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2023

Using Social Media Data to Investigate Public Perceptions of Cannabis as a Medicine: Narrative Review.

Sedigh Khademi, Christine Mary Hallinan, Mike Conway, Yvonne Bonomo

Open access · goldFull text readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Understanding social media discourse on antidepressants: unsupervised and sentiment analysis using X.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sedigh KhademiDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6146-1415
Christine Mary HallinanDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0471-4444
Mike ConwaySchool of Computing and Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3209-8108
Yvonne BonomoDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2583-0687
The University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use and acceptance of medicinal cannabis is on the rise across the globe. To support the interests of public health, evidence relating to its use, effects, and safety is required to match this community demand. Web-based user-generated data are often used by researchers and public health organizations for the investigation of consumer perceptions, market forces, population behaviors, and for pharmacoepidemiology.

objectiveIn this review, we aimed to summarize the findings of studies that have used user-generated text as a data source to study medicinal cannabis or the use of cannabis as medicine. Our objectives were to categorize the insights provided by social media research on cannabis as medicine and describe the role of social media for consumers using medicinal cannabis.

methodsThe inclusion criteria for this review were primary research studies and reviews that reported on the analysis of web-based user-generated content on cannabis as medicine. The MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched from January 1974 to April 2022.

resultsWe examined 42 studies published in English and found that consumers value their ability to exchange experiences on the web and tend to rely on web-based information sources. Cannabis discussions have portrayed the substance as a safe and natural medicine to help with many health conditions including cancer, sleep disorders, chronic pain, opioid use disorders, headaches, asthma, bowel disease, anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder. These discussions provide a rich resource for researchers to investigate medicinal cannabis-related consumer sentiment and experiences, including the opportunity to monitor cannabis effects and adverse events, given the anecdotal and often biased nature of the information is properly accounted for.

conclusionsThe extensive web-based presence of the cannabis industry coupled with the conversational nature of social media discourse results in rich but potentially biased information that is often not well-supported by scientific evidence. This review summarizes what social media is saying about the medicinal use of cannabis and discusses the challenges faced by health governance agencies and professionals to make use of web-based resources to both learn from medicinal cannabis users and provide factual, timely, and reliable evidence-based health information to consumers.

Indexed as

CannabisMedical MarijuanaSocial MediaHumansPublic HealthPublic OpinionMedical Marijuanainternetmedical marijuanamedicinal cannabispublic health surveillancesocial media

Identifiers

PMID36848191
PMCPMC10012004
OpenAlexW4322492846

What Socratic holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read28
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.