The effect of cannabis exposure on pubertal outcomes: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
E Danielle Sims,1–3 Sama Anvari,1,2,4,* Yung Lee,1,2,4,* Zainab Samaan,5 Laura Banfield,6 Lehana Thabane,1,7–10 M Constantine Samaan1–4,7 1Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 2Division of Pediatric Endocrinology, McMaster Children’s Hospital, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 3Medical Sciences Graduate Program, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 4Michael G. De Groote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 5Department of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 6Health Sciences Library, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 7Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 8Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 9Centre for Evaluation of Medicines, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 10Biostatistics Unit, St. Joseph’s Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada *These authors contributed equally to this work Purpose: Several countries are legalizing the use of medicinal cannabis and easing restrictions on its recreational use. While adults have been the primary target of these initiatives, expanding access to cannabis will likely lead to increased use by children. While the effects of cannabis on pediatric neuropsychological and mental health outcomes have been broadly studied, there are limited data on the physical health effects of cannabis, including endocrine health. Animal studies have shown that chronic cannabis use leads to delayed sexual maturation; however, its effects on pubertal outcomes in children are not well studied. This systematic review aimed to assess the effect of cannabis use on pubertal timing and tempo in children.Methods: We conducted a systematic review with literature searches in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Central, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus from inception to February 2018. A gray literature search was also completed in Clinicaltrials.gov and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I. The primary outcome was pubertal timing, while secondary outcomes included pubertal tempo and final height and weight. We had no restrictions on date or language of publication of papers. Two reviewers independently assessed records for eligibility, with a third reviewer resolving disagreements.Results: Our database and gray literature searches identified 759 records. A total of 29 full-text papers were assessed for eligibility. However, all studies were ultimately excluded as they did not meet the eligibility criteria.Conclusion: Our results highlight a significant gap in existing literature regarding the effects of cannabis use on puberty. Adequately powered longitudinal studies are urgently needed to provide pediatricians and other health care providers with high-quality information on the potential effects of cannabis on the physical health of children.Prospective Registrar of Systematic Reviews Registration: PROSPERO no.: CRD42018089397. Keywords: marijuana, puberty, children, pediatric, tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabis
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 | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".