Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39770486›Full record

ReviewPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Research and Clinical Practice Involving the Use of

João Luís Q Simei, José Diogo R Souza, João Francisco Pedrazzi, Francisco S Guimarães, Alline Cristina Campos, Antônio Zuardi, Jaime Eduardo C Hallak, José Alexandre S Crippa

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

8 authors.

João Luís Q SimeiDepartment of Neuroscience and Behavior, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0006-1929-0396
José Diogo R SouzaDepartment of Neuroscience and Behavior, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0001-2390-5684
João Francisco PedrazziDepartment of Neuroscience and Behavior, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.
Francisco S GuimarãesNational Institute for Science and Technology-Translational Medicine, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.
Alline Cristina CamposDepartment of Pharmacology, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-4258-3198
Antônio ZuardiDepartment of Neuroscience and Behavior, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.
Jaime Eduardo C HallakDepartment of Neuroscience and Behavior, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.
José Alexandre S CrippaDepartment of Neuroscience and Behavior, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-9520-6746

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 88887.980370/2024-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmerging evidence supports cannabidiol (CBD) as a promising therapeutic compound for various health conditions, despite its approval as a medication (product for medical purposes) remaining restricted to a limited range of clinical indications. Simultaneously, the regulation of cannabis-derived products for medicinal and recreational use has expanded their global market availability to meet local community demands. This scenario presents a complex challenge for clinicians, researchers, and industry, as the global appeal of therapeutic uses of CBD is growing more rapidly than the scientific evidence supporting its safety and effectiveness. OUTCOMES: A narrative review was conducted to discuss the best evidence regarding the pharmacological profile of CBD, its efficacy, and safety within the context of regulation and perspectives on the development of new cannabinoid-based drugs. Key articles addressing the various facets of this issue were selected for comprehensive analysis.

conclusionsClinicians and researchers may face unique challenges in understanding the pharmacological profile of CBD and the prospects for developing its clinical indications, given the heterogeneity of clinical terminologies and the quality and composition of cannabis-based medical products available on the market. More basic and clinical research that complies with regulatory agencies' testing guidelines, such as good manufacturing practices (GMPs), good laboratory practices (GLPs), and good clinical practices (GCPs), is needed to obtain approval for CBD or any other cannabinoid as a therapeutic for broader clinical indications.

Indexed as

cannabidiolcannabisdrug developmentendocannabinoid systemmedical cannabinoidsmedical cannabispharmacologyphytocannabinoids

Identifiers

PMID39770486
PMCPMC11677192

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.