ArticleCannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.)2026
Cannabis Dispensary Staff ("Budtender") Perspectives on Trustworthiness of Social Media Information: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Cannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.), 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Scientific and medical sources continue to be outpaced by the burgeoning cannabis marketplace regarding emerging forms of cannabis, leaving consumers with a great deal of uncertainty about safety and efficacy that may be addressed in cannabis dispensary and online settings. The present study examines how cannabis dispensary staff ("budtenders") use and evaluate the trustworthiness of online information about cannabis, especially social media content. Method: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with San Francisco Bay Area budtenders ( Results: Social media was not viewed as a reliable information source for dispensary-based social interactions. Budtenders were skeptical of most commercially-oriented social media content and frustrated with inconsistent content moderation practices of social media platforms. Budtenders instead preferred offline information sources and relationships, as well as information derived from first and secondhand experiences with cannabis products. When evaluating information on social media, online settings promoting privacy, community moderation, and accountability were seen as features of trustworthy environments. Budtenders also expressed a range of confidence in medical, natural healing, and personal experience frameworks of health and cannabis knowledge production; concordance of social media content with these frameworks was an additional signal of trustworthy information. Conclusions: This research highlights the role of budtenders in evaluating and triangulating emerging online cannabis information sources for consumers and the varied features and signals that cue budtenders to consider some online information as more trustworthy and credible for cannabis consumers.
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.