MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414434549 · doi:10.1111/epi.18622

Availability and affordability of cannabinoids for epilepsy treatment across different geographic settings—A survey from the <scp>ILAE</scp> Plant‐Based Therapy Task Force

2025· article· en· W4414434549 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kollencheri Puthenveettil Vinayan, Ali A. Asadi‐Pooya, Aruna Setumadhava Jyotsna, Siegward‐M. Elsas, Cecilie Johannessen Landmark, Motlalepula G. Matsabisa, Boulenouar Mesraoua, Finbar O’Callaghan, Elizabeth A. Thiele, Chunbo Zhang, Kate Riney

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEisaiUCB PharmaMarinus PharmaceuticalsNeurocrine BiosciencesCilagGW PharmaceuticalsZogenixMedicureLivaNovaGW ResearchBiogen
KeywordsEpilepsyDravet syndromeCannabidiolSynthetic cannabinoidsTask forceCannabis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pharmacoresistant seizures remain a major challenge for the global epilepsy community. Hence, approval of highly purified pharmaceutical grade cannabidiol (CBD) for Dravet syndrome (DS), Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS), and refractory seizures associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) generated significant interest, both in the medical community and public domain. However, there are limited data on the availability and accessibility of CBD and other cannabinoids for the treatment of drug‐resistant epilepsy worldwide. The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Plant‐Based Therapy Task Force commissioned a working group in 2022 to conduct a survey through the chapters to understand the global availability of cannabinoids for the treatment of epilepsy, and to identify the possible factors affecting the accessibility and affordability of these products. The survey was conducted between June and December 2023. Responses were screened, tabulated, and analyzed using pre‐set criteria. Among the 126 ILAE Chapters, 86 (68%) completed the survey questionnaire. Thirty‐two countries had regulatory approval for cannabinoids for the treatment of epilepsy at the time of this survey, of which 21 (65.6%) reported approval only for CBD. Twenty‐three chapters (71.8%) in this group reported cannabinoids to be unaffordable, and 18 (56.2%) reported they were difficult to access. Cannabinoids were not approved formally for epilepsy in 54 countries (62.7%). Over‐the‐counter availability of unapproved products containing cannabinoids was reported from 34 countries (39.5%). Forty‐seven chapters (54.6%) indicated the existence of traditional plant‐based products for epilepsy in their respective countries, of which 16 had products containing cannabinoids. Forty‐two chapters (48.8%) expressed a need for targeted advocacy efforts from the ILAE to improve the accessibility of cannabinoids for the management of epilepsy. This survey should act as a premise for developing better concerted strategies to improve the availability and affordability of cannabinoids for the management of epilepsy across the world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207