Cited by 215Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis

A literature review and meta-analyses of cannabis use and suicidality

Borges, Guilherme, Bagge, Courtney L., Orozco, Ricardo·2016·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background We lack a review of the epidemiological literature on cannabis use (acute use and chronic-usual quantity/frequency and heavy use) and suicidality (suicide death, suicide ideation, suicide attempt). Methods The English language literature on Medline, PsychInfo, Google Scholar, and public-use databases was searched for original articles, critical review reports, and public use data on cannabis use and suicide for the period ranging from 1990-2015 (February). Odds ratios (OR) from random effects in meta-analyses for any cannabis use and heavy cannabis use were calculated. Results The acute cannabis-suicidality literature mostly includes descriptive toxicology reports. In terms of death by suicide, the average positive cannabis rate was 9.50% for studies sampling from all suicides, with higher cannabis detection rates amongst suicide decedents by non-overdose methods. We found only 4 studies providing estimates for any chronic cannabis use and death by suicide (OR=2.56 (1.25-5.27)). After deleting duplicates we found 6 studies on any cannabis use and suicide ideation (OR=1.43 (1.13-1.83)), 5 studies on heavy cannabis use and suicide ideation (OR=2.53 (1.00-6.39)), 6 studies on any cannabis use and suicide attempt (OR=2.23 (1.24-4.00)) and 6 studies on heavy cannabis use and suicide attempt (OR=3.20 (1.72-5.94)). Conclusions We currently lack evidence that acute cannabis use increases imminent risk for suicidality. The evidence tends to support that chronic cannabis use can predict suicidality, but the lack of homogeneity in the measurement of cannabis exposure and, in some instances, the lack of systematic control for known risk factors tempered this finding.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.007

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Borges, G., Bagge, C. L., & Orozco, R.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (MX)
  • University of Mississippi Medical Center (US)
  • Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz (MX)
Corresponding author
Borges, Guilherme
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-05
Volume
195
Pages
63-74
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2264368923
Cited by
214
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Management of Substance Abuse (MSB)
  • Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse (MSD)
  • World Health Organization
  • World Health Organization (WHO)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Keywords
cannabis use, suicidality, suicide, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, heavy cannabis use, chronic cannabis use, suicide risk factors
MeSH terms
Cannabis, Marijuana Abuse, Diseases in Twins, Humans, Risk Factors, Social Environment, Suicide, Suicide, Attempted, Substance-Related Disorders, Suicidal Ideation

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