The Effects of Cannabis on Female Reproductive Health Across the Life Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cannabis is commonly used for its medicinal and therapeutic benefits and is also widely used as a recreational drug. Cannabis use has been increasing in Canada, including among Canadian women of reproductive age. Post-legalization, further increases in cannabis use are expected as a result of increased availability and lowered perceptions of harm. Although cannabinoids are well known for their effects on the central and peripheral nervous systems, endocannabinoid receptors have also been characterized throughout the female reproductive tract. Cannabinoids may affect many aspects of female reproductive health, including fertility, pregnancy outcomes with neonatal implications, and menopause. The existing literature is primarily concentrated on the effect of cannabis use in pregnancy and breastfeeding, with little exploration of its impact on fertility and in later life. In this review, we consolidate the available literature to provide an overview of trends in cannabis use among women and review the impact of cannabis across the female reproductive lifespan. We searched the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases using keywords and MeSH terms. Included studies were those reporting on the potential impact of cannabinoids on female fertility, pregnancy, transmission to breastmilk, neonatal outcomes and menopause.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".