ArticleJournal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN2026
Sex differences in the acute effects of cannabis: the need for hypothesis-driven research.
Article in Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Sex and gender can impact cannabis use and related harms, yet the field has historically centered men and male bodies. In our recent systematic review of sex differences in the acute cognitive effects of cannabis, just six of 29 human studies found evidence that female and male participants differed in cognitive responses to cannabis. The goal of this Commentary is to discuss methodological limitations of published studies that complicate interpretation of data and to suggest priorities for future research to move this topic forward. We highlight inadequate statistical power, poor definition and measurement of sex, lack of consideration of sex- or gender-related characteristics, and no inclusion of transgender and gender-diverse individuals in prior studies. Future research should take an intersectional perspective, incorporate hypothesis-driven sex- and gender-informed designs, ensure adequate power for interaction analyses, and consider sex-related variables across the lifespan. This approach is necessary to advance scientific rigor and promote equitable health outcomes related to cannabis use.
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.