ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Adverse events associated with medical cannabis reported within a centralized call center.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The use of medical cannabis products is expanding, yet real-world data on associated adverse events (AEs) remain limited. Controlled trials often exclude diverse patient populations and product types, making post-marketing surveillance essential to understanding cannabinoid safety. Objective: The aim of this study is to characterize AEs reported by patients enrolled in the Minnesota Medical Cannabis Program and explore associations between AE severity, cannabinoid doses, and product types. Materials and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of AEs reported between 2015 and 2021 by individuals receiving products from a single licensed manufacturer. Demographic data, qualifying condition, cannabis formulation, and daily purified cannabidiol (CBD)/delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) doses were collected. AEs were classified by severity and analyzed in relation to cannabinoid content and product formulation using non-parametric Mann-Whitney U tests ( Results: A total of 237 calls were received from 225 individuals reporting 692 symptoms. Most calls were from medical cannabis consumers (79.3%) and were predominantly classified as minor in severity (71.7%). Most AEs were associated with THC-dominant products (39.8%), and capsule formulations (36.8% of the overall products) were most commonly implicated. Among individuals with dose data, those with moderate AEs were associated with significantly higher daily THC doses than those with minor AEs ( Conclusion: Although AEs were infrequently reported, they were often clinically meaningful and led to treatment discontinuation. The voluntary nature of reporting likely underestimates the actual AE burden, capturing only more severe or bothersome events. These findings underscore the need for enhanced pharmacovigilance systems and further research into the long-term safety and public health implications of cannabinoid therapies, especially among medically complex patients.
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.