Recommendation to reconsider examining cannabis subtypes together due to opposing effects on brain, cognition and behavior.
Open accessAbstract
Cannabis use represents a major public health issue throughout the globe. Yet, we still lack the most fundamental knowledge on long-term effects of cannabis on neural, cognitive, and behavioral function. Part of this stems from how cannabis has been measured historically. To this end, most empirical examinations of cannabis have consolidated all types of cannabis collectively. However, this approach obscures differences in how cannabinoids operate. In this commentary, we address the contrasting properties of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) and their opposing effects on cognitive function. In addition, we address the increase in cannabis potency throughout the past two decades and how that impacts generalizability of early data to evaluations of contemporary public health. We underscore the urgent need for future research to disaggregate examination of THC from CBD, along with the importance of measuring cannabis potency to more effectively unravel its influence on cognitive function and other health issues.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Adolescents at risk of substance use problems may display cognitive vulnerabilities that could partially contribute to the cognitive findings, although they do not exclude additional deficits.
“Adolescents at risk of substance use problems may display cognitive vulnerabilities, 17,[117][118][119][120] which could partially contribute to cognitive findings described here, although they do not exclude the possibility of additional deficits.”
From Association of Cannabis With Cognitive Functioning in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2018) · cites this paper as [117]
The Abstract (page unavailable) discusses mixed findings on cannabis use and cognition, including prospective studies involving adolescents. It does not address whether adolescents at risk of substance use problems have pre-existing cognitive vulnerabilities that partly explain those findings; searches for that point and for pre-existing IQ differences found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.73)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 24
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Laprairie RB, Bagher AM, Kelly ME, Denovan-Wright EM, 2015 Cannabidiol is a negative allosteric modulator of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor. Br. J. Pharmacol 172, 4790– 4805. 26218440 PMC4621983
- Pertwee RG, 2008 The diverse CB1 and CB2 receptor pharmacology of three plant cannabinoids: delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol and delta9-tetrahydrocannabivarin. Br. J. Pharmacol 153, 199– 215. 17828291 PMC2219532
- Authors
- Rømer Thomsen, K., Callesen, M. B., & Feldstein Ewing, S. W.
- Affiliations
- Aarhus University (DK)
- Venue
- Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-09
- Volume
- 80
- Pages
- 156-158
- ISSN
- 0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6373765
- OpenAlex
- W2620915347
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 1.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA023658)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychedelics and Drug Studies
- Keywords
- tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol, cannabis potency, cognitive function, long-term cannabis use
- MeSH terms
- Brain, Cannabidiol, Cannabis, Cognition, Humans, Schizophrenia, Dronabinol
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
