The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Residual effects of cannabis use on neurocognitive performance after prolonged abstinence: A meta-analysis.
Open accessAbstract
Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in the U.S., and the number of illicit and licit users is rising. Lasting neurocognitive changes or deficits as a result of use are frequently noted despite a lack of clarity in the scientific literature. In an effort to resolve inconsistencies in the evidence of lasting residual effects of cannabis use, we conducted two meta-analyses. First, we updated a previous meta-analysis on broad nonacute cognitive effects of cannabis use through inclusion of newer studies. In a second meta-analysis, we focused on evidence for lasting residual effects by including only studies that tested users after at least 25 days of abstinence. In the first meta-analysis, 33 studies met inclusion criteria. Results indicated a small negative effect for global neurocognitive performance as well for most cognitive domains assessed. Unfortunately, methodological limitations of these studies prevented the exclusion of withdrawal symptoms as an explanation for observed effects. In the second meta-analysis, 13 of the original 33 studies met inclusion criteria. Results indicated no significant effect of cannabis use on global neurocognitive performance or any effect on the eight assessed domains. Overall, these meta-analyses demonstrate that any negative residual effects on neurocognitive performance attributable to either cannabis residue or withdrawal symptoms are limited to the first 25 days of abstinence. Furthermore, there was no evidence for enduring negative effects of cannabis use.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Meta-Analysis: Recent Developments in Quantitative Methods for Literature Reviews
Rosenthal, R., & DiMatteo, M. R. (2001) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.59 · Cited by 1,780
Crean, R. D., Crane, N. A., & Mason, B. J. (2011) · Journal of Addiction Medicine · doi:10.1097/adm.0b013e31820c23fa · Cited by 732
Impact of Cannabis Use on Brain Function in Adolescents
JACOBSEN, L. K., MENCL, W. E., WESTERVELD, M., & PUGH, K. R. (2004) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1196/annals.1308.053 · Cited by 128
Cited by
Effects of Cannabis Use on Human Behavior, Including Cognition, Motivation, and Psychosis: A Review
Volkow, N. D., Swanson, J. M., Evins, A. E., DeLisi, L. E., Meier, M. H., Gonzalez, R., Bloomfield, M. A. P., Curran, H. V., & Baler, R. (2016) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.3278 · Cited by 867
Acute and Chronic Effects of Cannabinoids on Human Cognition—A Systematic Review
Broyd, S. J., van Hell, H. H., Beale, C., Yücel, M., & Solowij, N. (2016) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2015.12.002 · Cited by 674
Scott, J. C., Slomiak, S. T., Jones, J. D., Rosen, A. F. G., Moore, T. M., & Gur, R. C. (2018) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0335 · Cited by 391
Cannabis and adolescent brain development.
Lubman, D. I., Cheetham, A., & Yücel, M. (2015) · Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2014.11.009 · Cited by 360
Nugent, S. M., Morasco, B. J., O'Neil, M. E., Freeman, M., Low, A., Kondo, K., Elven, C., Zakher, B., Motu'apuaka, M., Paynter, R., et al. (2017) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m17-0155 · Cited by 301
Reviewing the Potential of Psychedelics for the Treatment of PTSD
Krediet, E., Bostoen, T., Breeksema, J., van Schagen, A., Passie, T., & Vermetten, E. (2020) · International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1093/ijnp/pyaa018 · Cited by 260
Burggren, A. C., Shirazi, A., Ginder, N., & London, E. D. (2019) · The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse · doi:10.1080/00952990.2019.1634086 · Cited by 144
Dellazizzo, L., Potvin, S., Giguère, S., & Dumais, A. (2022) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/add.15764 · Cited by 120
Castellanos-Ryan, N., Pingault, J.-B., Parent, S., Vitaro, F., Tremblay, R. E., & Séguin, J. R. (2017) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579416001280 · Cited by 111
The Behavioral Sequelae of Cannabis Use in Healthy People: A Systematic Review
Sorkhou, M., Bedder, R. H., & George, T. P. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2021.630247 · Cited by 61
Adverse effects of heavy cannabis use: Even plants can harm the brain
Sideli, L., Trotta, G., Spinazzola, E., La Cascia, C., & Di Forti, M. (2021) · Pain · doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001963 · Cited by 36
Power, E., Sabherwal, S., Healy, C., O’ Neill, A., Cotter, D., & Cannon, M. (2021) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291720005036 · Cited by 34
O’Connor, E., Thomas, R., Senger, C. A., Perdue, L., Robalino, S., & Patnode, C. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.1432 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Schreiner, A. M., & Dunn, M. E.
- Venue
- Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 420-429
- ISSN
- 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-2293
- OpenAlex
- W1968690821
- Cited by
- 289
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 5.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
