Cited by 160Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 119 of the 120 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Considering Cannabis: The Effects of Regular Cannabis Use on Neurocognition in Adolescents and Young Adults

Open access
Lisdahl, Krista M., Wright, Natasha E., Medina-Kirchner, Christopher, Maple, Kristin E., Shollenbarger, Skyler·2014·Current Addiction Reports

Abstract

Thirty-six percent of high school seniors have used cannabis in the past year, and an alarming 6.5% smoked cannabis daily, up from 2.4% in 1993 (Johnston et al., 2013). Adolescents and emerging adults are undergoing significant neurodevelopment and animal studies suggest they may be particularly vulnerable to negative drug effects. In this review, we will provide a detailed overview of studies outlining the effects of regular (at least weekly) cannabis use on neurocognition, including studies outlining cognitive, structural and functional findings. We will also explore the public health impact of this research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40429-014-0019-6

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 120 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. National Institute on Drug Abuse. NIDA DrugFacts: marijuana. Washington: National Institute on Drug Abuse, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–156 of 156

Metadata

Authors
Lisdahl, K. M., Wright, N. E., Medina-Kirchner, C., Maple, K. E., & Shollenbarger, S.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
Corresponding author
Lisdahl, Krista M.
Venue
Current Addiction Reports
Published
2014-04-26
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
144-156
ISSN
2196-2952 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2101846840
Cited by
160
References
120
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 2
FWCI
12.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Addiction Reports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA030354)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Keywords
cannabis use, neurocognitive function, adolescents, young adults, brain development, cognitive function, brain structure, brain function, public health impact

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review