SynthesisAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026
The prevalence of cannabidiol (CBD) use in North America and Europe: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The prevalence of cannabidiol (CBD) use in North America and Europe: A meta-analysis.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe global cannabidiol (CBD) market has expanded in recent years. Several studies suggest CBD use, whether for medical or recreational purposes, is on the rise; however, no systematic assessments of its prevalence have been conducted so far. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the prevalence of CBD use in North America and Europe independently.
methodsSearches were conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Science on 25 March 2025. A total of 43 studies (48 distinct samples; n = 388 447; 57.52% female) from North America (k = 30; n = 353 088) and Europe (k = 13; n = 35 359) were included in the analyses. The prevalence was estimated at five time periods (i.e. lifetime, past 12 months, past 30 days, past 7 days and daily use) separately for each continent region. Differences in prevalence estimates by sex, year of data collection and sample type (i.e. clinical versus community) were examined. Publication bias was estimated using several indicators, and the methodological quality of the studies was appraised using the Joana Brigg's Institute (JBI) checklist.
resultsIn preliminary analyses of heterogeneity there was evidence of differences in prevalence between North America and Europe across all time periods (P-value range: < 0.001-0.057). Consequently, the pooled prevalence estimates were calculated for both continental regions separately. In Europe, the pooled lifetime prevalence of CBD use was 12.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.06-0.25], 17.6% (95% CI = 0.11-0.28) in the past 12 months, 7.2% (95% CI = 0.02-0.21) in the past month, 4.3% (95% CI = 0.01-0.13) in the past week and 2.1% (95% CI = 0.01-0.08) daily. In North America, lifetime pooled estimates were 28.9% (95% CI = 0.2-0.39), 19.5% in the past 12 months (95% CI = 0.11-0.32), 12% in the past month (95% CI = 0.07-0.2), 10.5% in the past week (95% CI = 0.01-0.47) and 6.4% daily (95% CI = 0.03-0.13). Of the moderators tested, sample type statistically significantly influenced the meta-analyses. In Europe, clinical samples (25.6%) reported higher past-year prevalence of CBD use in comparison with community samples (11.6%), whereas in North America there was higher past-year use of CBD among community samples (26.1%) compared with clinical samples (4.1%).
conclusionsCannabidiol use appears to be more prevalent in North America compared with Europe.
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.