Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42540830›Full record

ReviewCannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.)2026

Cannabis Use Motives Across the Reproductive Continuum: An Integrative Literature Review.

Alysa Roland

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Alysa RolandFran and Earl Ziegler College of Nursing, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Cannabis is one of the most used substances in pregnancy, with an estimated 10% of U.S. pregnancies affected by cannabis use. Although research has linked fetal cannabis exposure to potential risks, many pregnant women continue to use cannabis for diverse medical and nonmedical reasons. Motives for substance use are modifiable targets for intervention that can be leveraged for tailored intervention and prevention strategies, yet little work has been done to integrate women's motives for cannabis use across the reproductive continuum. Method: To address this gap, this integrative review examines literature on cannabis motives across reproductive time periods using the Whittemore and Knafl approach, to map the range of motives reported across studies, synthesize distinct motives into meaningful categories, and examine how motives are related to cannabis use behavior-including frequency, initiation and persistence. Results: Overall, 33 studies met inclusion criteria with 27 focused on the prenatal period and no studies exclusively on preconception, for a total of 45 period-specific observations. Across the reproductive continuum, medical/therapeutic motives were frequently reported (97%) and were linked to persistent and frequent use. Coping motives were also linked to use behavior and were more prominent during postpartum compared to preconception or prenatal periods (100% vs. 80% vs. 79%, respectively). Recreational and social motives appeared more often preconception. Conclusions: Altogether, motives for cannabis use were varied and dynamic, but medical motives were the most consistent across the reproductive continuum. Motives can provide a framework for non-stigmatizing intervention that distinguishes symptom driven use, bridges provider communication barriers, and acknowledges patient reported benefits.

Indexed as

cannabisintegrative reviewpregnancyreproductive healthsubstance use motives

Identifiers

PMID42540830
PMCPMC13426747

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.