6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The adverse health effects and harms related to marijuana use: an overview review

      , , , ,
      CMAJ Open
      Joule Inc.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d5025435e118"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d5025435e119">Background</h5> <p id="d5025435e121">With impending marijuana legislation in Canada, a broad understanding of the harms associated with marijuana use is needed to inform the clinical community and public, and to support evidence-informed public policy development. The purpose of the review was to synthesize the evidence on adverse health effects and harms of marijuana use. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d5025435e123"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d5025435e124">Methods</h5> <p id="d5025435e126">We searched MEDLINE, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Health Technology Assessment Database from the inception of each database to May 2018. Given that systematic reviews evaluating one or other specific harm have been published, this is an overview review with the primary objective of assessing a health effect or harm. Data on author, country and year of publication, search strategy and results, and outcomes were extracted. Quality was assessed using the AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) checklist. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d5025435e128"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d5025435e129">Results</h5> <p id="d5025435e131">The final analysis included 68 reviews. Evidence of harm was reported in 62 reviews for several mental health disorders, brain changes, cognitive outcomes, pregnancy outcomes and testicular cancer. Inconclusive evidence was found for 20 outcomes (some mental health outcomes, other types of cancers and all-cause mortality). No evidence of harm was reported for 6 outcomes. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="d5025435e133"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d5025435e134">Interpretation</h5> <p id="d5025435e136">Harm was associated with most outcomes assessed. These results should be viewed with concern by physicians and policy-makers given the prevalence of use, the persistent reporting of a lack of recognition of marijuana as a possibly harmful substance and the emerging context of legalization for recreational use. </p> </div>

          Related collections

          Most cited references61

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Acute cannabis consumption and motor vehicle collision risk: systematic review of observational studies and meta-analysis

          Objective To determine whether the acute consumption of cannabis (cannabinoids) by drivers increases the risk of a motor vehicle collision. Design Systematic review of observational studies, with meta-analysis. Data sources We did electronic searches in 19 databases, unrestricted by year or language of publication. We also did manual searches of reference lists, conducted a search for unpublished studies, and reviewed the personal libraries of the research team. Review methods We included observational epidemiology studies of motor vehicle collisions with an appropriate control group, and selected studies that measured recent cannabis use in drivers by toxicological analysis of whole blood or self report. We excluded experimental or simulator studies. Two independent reviewers assessed risk of bias in each selected study, with consensus, using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Risk estimates were combined using random effects models. Results We selected nine studies in the review and meta-analysis. Driving under the influence of cannabis was associated with a significantly increased risk of motor vehicle collisions compared with unimpaired driving (odds ratio 1.92 (95% confidence interval 1.35 to 2.73); P=0.0003); we noted heterogeneity among the individual study effects (I2=81). Collision risk estimates were higher in case-control studies (2.79 (1.23 to 6.33); P=0.01) and studies of fatal collisions (2.10 (1.31 to 3.36); P=0.002) than in culpability studies (1.65 (1.11 to 2.46); P=0.07) and studies of non-fatal collisions (1.74 (0.88 to 3.46); P=0.11). Conclusions Acute cannabis consumption is associated with an increased risk of a motor vehicle crash, especially for fatal collisions. This information could be used as the basis for campaigns against drug impaired driving, developing regional or national policies to control acute drug use while driving, and raising public awareness.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The association between cannabis use and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies

            Longitudinal studies reporting the association between cannabis use and developing depression provide mixed results. The objective of this study was to establish the extent to which different patterns of use of cannabis are associated with the development of depression using meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Deficits in behavioural inhibition in substance abuse and addiction: a meta-analysis.

              Deficits in behavioural inhibitory control are attracting increasing attention as a factor behind the development and maintenance of substance dependence. However, evidence for such a deficit is varied in the literature. Here, we synthesised published results to determine whether inhibitory ability is reliably impaired in substance users compared to controls. The meta-analysis used fixed-effects models to integrate results from 97 studies that compared groups with heavy substance use or addiction-like behaviours with healthy control participants on two experimental paradigms commonly used to assess response inhibition: the Go/NoGo task, and the Stop-Signal Task (SST). The primary measures of interest were commission errors to NoGo stimuli and stop-signal reaction time in the SST. Additionally, we examined omission errors to Go stimuli, and reaction time in both tasks. Because inhibition is more difficult when inhibition is required infrequently, we considered papers with rare and equiprobable NoGo stimuli separately. Inhibitory deficits were apparent for heavy use/dependence on cocaine, MDMA, methamphetamine, tobacco, and alcohol (and, to a lesser extent, non-dependent heavy drinkers), and in pathological gamblers. On the other hand, no evidence for an inhibitory deficit was observed for opioids or cannabis, and contradictory evidence was observed for internet addiction. The results are generally consistent with the view that substance use disorders and addiction-like behavioural disorders are associated with impairments in inhibitory control. Implications for treatment of substance use are discussed, along with suggestions for future research arising from the limitations of the extant literature. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                CMAJ Open
                cmajo
                Joule Inc.
                2291-0026
                August 16 2018
                2018
                August 16 2018
                2018
                : 6
                : 3
                : E339-E346
                Article
                10.9778/cmajo.20180023
                6182105
                30115639
                53236038-17ba-479d-bb45-df4e23a39971
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article