ArticleBrain and behavior2026
UK Medical Cannabis Registry: A Clinical Outcomes Analysis for Migraine.
Article in Brain and behavior, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMigraine is a primary headache disorder, which leads to diminished health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There is limited evidence assessing efficacy of cannabis-based medicinal products (CBMPs) for migraine. This study investigates the efficacy and safety of CBMPs to treat migraine headache using validated patient-reported outcome measures.
methodsThis case series utilizes data from the UK Medical Cannabis Registry. Primary outcomes included changes in Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment Test (MIDAS), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7), Single Item Sleep Quality Scale (SQS), and EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L) from baseline up to 24 months. Adverse events (AEs) and their severity were recorded. A p-value < 0.050 was statistically significant.
resultsTwo hundred and three adult patients met inclusion criteria. Improvements at all intervals up to 24 months, relative to baseline, were observed in the HIT-6, GAD-7, SQS, and EQ-5D-5L (p < 0.010) and up to 12 months in the MIDAS (p < 0.050). Female sex (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.98, p = 0.046) and a bottom quartile THC dose (OR 0.25, CI 0.06-0.93, p = 0.047) were negative predictors of MIDAS improvement. One in seven (n = 31; 15.27%) patients reported 249 AEs (n = 110, 44.18% mild; n = 79, 31.73% moderate; n = 57, 26.91% severe; n = 3, 1.20% life-threatening). DISCUSSION: CBMPs were associated with improvements in HRQoL measures up to 2 years, being relatively well tolerated. Higher THC doses were associated with a greater likelihood of improvement on migraine-specific measures, although wide confidence intervals warrant caution in interpreting results.
conclusionFindings indicate utility of CBMPs for migraine, but randomized controlled trials are required to establish causation.
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.