ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2026
A Feasibility Assessment of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System for the Detection of Cannabis-Related Safety Signals.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe applicability of spontaneous reporting systems such as the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to detect cannabis-related safety signals remains unclear due to the potential for discrepant reporting patterns between pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical cannabis-derived products (CDPs).
methodsWe conducted a descriptive analysis of seven groups of CDP reports submitted to FAERS between 1999 and 2023 to investigate product definitions and reporting patterns. We then performed hypothesis-free disproportionality analyses using reporting odds ratio, proportional reporting ratio, and information component for pharmaceutical cannabidiol (CBD) and non-pharmaceutical CBD reports to assess differences in signal detection profiles, potential exposure misclassification, and the influence of reporting context.
resultsWe identified 42 530 reports related to CDPs, characterized by highly heterogeneous terminology and variable reporting patterns by product type, reflecting the real-world CDP usage. Epidiolex reports often involved pediatric patients, whereas non-pharmaceutical CBD reports were more frequently associated with older adults and concomitant product use. Disproportionality analysis showed divergent signal profiles, with strong seizure-related events predominating for Epidiolex and a broader range of signals, including neoplasm-related and neurological events, observed for non-pharmaceutical CBD. These differences likely reflected variations in CDP indication and utilization and reporting behaviors.
conclusionsThis study showed that signal detection using FAERS has potential feasibility for CDP safety surveillance. However, unique challenges related to exposure definitions, reporting patterns, motivation for utilization, and the need for a robust study design must be addressed to ensure reliable safety signal detection.
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.