ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Understanding the online landscape of cannabis discourse: a Twitter analysis.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Consultations and admissions for pathologies related to cannabis use are growing ininterrumpedly. The lack of public awareness of the risks can have a negative impact on our society, as well as on new policy proposals. In response, we set out to investigate social media posts about cannabis to better understand the online environment in this regard. Design setting and measures: The study will analyze a dataset of tweets posted between 2018 and 2022, written in Spanish, that include the keyword cannabis, marihuana, or hachis. A total of 68,673 tweets were included in our study. A subset of 500 posts for each keyword was manually analyzed by a researcher to establish a codebook. Subsequently, Machine Learning techniques were employed to analyze the remaining 67,173 comments using the established codebook. Finally, 32,646 of the remaining tweets were excluded as they contained information unrelated to the objectives of this study. Findings: Our research reveals a pronounced Twitter user engagement with cannabis, primarily centered on its regulatory and health dimensions. In more detail, 73.2% of the analyzed tweets were in favor and only 3.5% of the population expressed against its regulation, whereas only 20.4% of the tweets discussed the negative effects of cannabis on physical or mental health. Additionally, 30.1% of the tweets are in favor of the therapeutic use of cannabis, while 69.9% of tweets manifest neutral or against therapeutic use. Our findings also show significant differences on these topics depending on the user type and between consumers versus non-consumers. Conclusion: This analysis of tweets about cannabis provides information on experiences and opinions related to its use. Therefore, the perspectives of Twitter users constitute valuable input that can help improve physicians' knowledge about cannabis and their communication with patients about its dangerousness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.