MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159904901 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab072.693

695 Cannabinoids and Sleep Health in Patients with Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3159904901 on OpenAlexaff
Aidan McParland, Daniel Kapustin, Anuj Bhatia, Hance Clarke, Aditya Trivedi, Richard Brull, Mandeep Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuropathic painPlaceboRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisCannabisAnesthesiaSomnolenceChronic painNauseaAdverse effectInternal medicinePhysical therapyPsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Neuropathic pain (NP) syndromes are debilitating conditions which can impact sleep health and overall quality of life significantly. Pharmacological treatment with cannabinoids has not been evaluated for its impact on sleep health. The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to determine the effect of cannabinoids on sleep quality, pain control, and patient impression of treatment efficacy. Methods We reviewed randomized controlled trials comparing synthetic and natural cannabinoids (CB) to placebo in patients with central and peripheral neuropathic pain syndromes. A systematic search of the standard literature databases was conducted, including randomized controlled trials evaluating the pharmacological treatment of NP syndromes using cannabinoids. Data on NRS pain scales, sleep quality, daytime somnolence, nausea, dizziness, and patient global impression of change (PGIC) scores were recorded. Meta-analysis using the random effects model was conducted where appropriate. Results Of the 3536 studies screened, a total of 8 randomized controlled trials including 1051 patients (placebo: 478 patients; CB: 573 patients) with neuropathic pain were included. Cannabinoids included in the studies were Sativex (GW-1000–02), Nabilone, and medical cannabis preparations with THC dose ranging from 1mg to 130mg per day. Pain scores were significantly reduced in the CB group (standardized difference in means (SDM) = -0.236, 95% CI=-0.375 to -0.100, p-value = 0.001) compared to placebo (Figure 1). Significant improvement in sleep quality (Figure 2) was also observed in the CB group (SMD 0.389, 95% CI, 0.233 to 0.546, p<0.013). Additionally, patients in the CB group were more likely to report improvement in PGIC scores (OR=2.3, 95% CI 1.37 to 3.9, p=0.002) compared to patients treated with placebo (Figure 3). Notably, CB-treated patients were more likely to experience daytime somnolence (OR=2.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.9, p=0.004), nausea (OR=1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.5, p=0.02), and dizziness (OR=3.8, 95% CI 2.6 to 5.7, p<0.001). Conclusion Cannabinoids are useful agents for NP as evidenced by significant improvement in pain, sleep quality, and PGIC. With the advent of new agents and more refined cannabis derivatives, further research is needed to comprehensively explore treatment effectiveness. Future work should incorporate clinically validated measures of sleep health to better evaluate this outcome. Support (if any):

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207