Cited by 305Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisPsychedelics and Drug Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of cannabidiol on the acute memory and psychotomimetic effects of smoked cannabis: naturalistic study

Open access
Morgan, Celia J. A., Schafer, Gráinne, Freeman, Tom P., Curran, H. Valerie·2010·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The two main constituents of cannabis, cannabidiol and Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), have opposing effects both pharmacologically and behaviourally when administered in the laboratory. Street cannabis is known to contain varying levels of each cannabinoid. AIMS: To study how the varying levels of cannabidiol and THC have an impact on the acute effects of the drug in naturalistic settings. METHOD: Cannabis users (n = 134) were tested 7 days apart on measures of memory and psychotomimetic symptoms, once while they were drug free and once while acutely intoxicated by their own chosen smoked cannabis. Using an unprecedented methodology, a sample of cannabis (as well as saliva) was collected from each user and analysed for levels of cannabinoids. On the basis of highest and lowest cannabidiol content of cannabis, two groups of individuals were directly compared. RESULTS: Groups did not differ in the THC content of the cannabis they smoked. Unlike the marked impairment in prose recall of individuals who smoked cannabis low in cannabidiol, participants smoking cannabis high in cannabidiol showed no memory impairment. Cannabidiol content did not affect psychotomimetic symptoms, which were elevated in both groups when intoxicated. CONCLUSIONS: The antagonistic effects of cannabidiol at the CB(1) receptor are probably responsible for its profile in smoked cannabis, attenuating the memory-impairing effects of THC. In terms of harm reduction, users should be made aware of the higher risk of memory impairment associated with smoking low-cannabidiol strains of cannabis like 'skunk' and encouraged to use strains containing higher levels of cannabidiol.

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 · 10.1192/bjp.bp.110.077503

Cites

34 of 34 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 30 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 10.1038/sj.npp.1300496 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 2006, Annual Report 2006: The State of the Drugs Problem in Europe
  3. 2009, Health Survey Findings for England 2008
  4. Hardwick, 2008, Home Office Cannabis Potency Study
  5. 10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.08.027 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 305

Metadata

Authors
Morgan, C. J. A., Schafer, G., Freeman, T. P., & Curran, H. V.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Curran, H. Valerie
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2010-10
Volume
197
Issue
4
Pages
285-290
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2015441565
Cited by
305
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 23
FWCI
13.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › 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
cannabidiol, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabis smoking, psychotomimetic effects, CB1 receptor antagonism, harm reduction, prose recall, cannabis users
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Alcohol Drinking, Analysis of Variance, Cannabidiol, Cannabinoids, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Marijuana Smoking, Memory, Memory Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Mental Recall, Saliva, Dronabinol, Verbal Learning, Receptor, Cannabinoid, CB1, Young Adult

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