MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204447327 · doi:10.1007/s00213-021-05960-2

Co-exposure of cannabinoids with amphetamines and biological, behavioural and health outcomes: a scoping review of animal and human studies

2021· review· en· W3204447327 on OpenAlexaff
Dimitri Daldegan‐Bueno, Lucas Oliveira Maia, Michelle Glass, Didier Jutras‐Aswad, Benedikt Fischer

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychopharmacology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité de MontréalSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmphetamineCannabisAddictionMethamphetamineCINAHLPsychiatryPsycINFOCannabinoidMedicineCannabidiolEffects of cannabisSynthetic cannabinoidsPharmacologyMEDLINEPsychologyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: The growing prevalence of psychostimulant (including amphetamine) use and associated health harms, with limited treatment options, present a global challenge. There is an increasing availability and medical applications of cannabinoids, and growing interest in their therapeutic potential for addictive disorders. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to review available data regarding cannabis/cannabinoid co-use or exposure on amphetamine-related outcomes. METHODS: Towards the present scoping review, we systematically searched four databases (Medline, Web-of-Science, CINAHL Plus and PsycInfo) using cannabis/cannabinoid and amphetamine text-terms identifying peer-reviewed, English-language studies published in 2000-2020 involving multiple methods approaches among both human and animal study samples, assessing the association of co-use/administration of cannabis/cannabinoids products with non-medical amphetamines on biological, behavioural or health outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-five articles were included. Pre-clinical studies (n = 15) found mostly protective effects of single or repeated cannabinoids administration on rodents in amphetamine addiction models, amphetamine-induced models of human mental disorders (e.g. schizophrenia) and amphetamine-induced neurotoxicity. Human studies (n = 10) were more heterogeneously designed (e.g. cross-sectional, case-control, longitudinal) and assessed natural ongoing cannabis and methamphetamine use or dependence, showing mostly enhanced harms in a diversity of outcomes (e.g. mental health, methamphetamine use, cognition). CONCLUSIONS: While human studies suggest cannabis use as an adverse risk factor among non-medical amphetamine users, pre-clinical studies suggest therapeutic potential of cannabinoids, especially cannabidiol, to alleviate amphetamine addiction and harms, including treatment outcomes. Given increasing psychostimulant harms but lack of care options, rigorous, high-quality design studies should aim to translate and investigate pre-clinical study results for potential therapeutic benefits of cannabinoids for amphetamine use/abuse in human subjects.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychopharmacologySame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207