Cannabinoids for treating psychiatric disorders in youth: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Background Cannabinoids have been of increasing interest mainly due to their putative efficacy in a wide array of psychiatric, psychosomatic, and neurological conditions.Aims This systematic review aims to synthesize results from randomized placebo-controlled trials regarding the efficacy and the dosage of cannabinoids as therapeutics in psychiatric disorders in children, adolescents, and young adults.Methods All publications up to June 30th, 2024, were included from PubMed and Embase. Eligibility criteria in accordance with the PRISMA-guidelines was applied. RCTs providing pre- and post-treatment parameters on cannabinoid therapies for mental disorders in comparison to controls in an age range from 0 to 25 years were included. Effect sizes were calculated as Hedges' g for primary outcomes, and a multilevel random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to account for dependent outcomes from same study populations.Results We identified 7603 records, of which 8 independent clinical trials (reported in 9 publications) met the pre-established eligibility criteria, comprising 474 unique participants (245 treatment, 229 control). Analysis of 13 primary outcomes (of 7 clinical trials) revealed a modest positive overall effect for symptom improvement or normalization of brain physiology (Hedges' g = 0.308, 95% CI: 0.167, 0.448). Autism spectrum disorder studies showed the most consistent evidence (g = 0.264, 95% CI: 0.107, 0.421), while other conditions showed wider confidence intervals. Age-stratified analysis showed that adult populations (mean age 23.3 years, n = 5 outcomes) demonstrated higher effect sizes (g = 0.463, SD = 0.402) compared to pediatric populations (mean age 11.8 years, n = 8 outcomes; g = 0.318, SD = 0.212). Whole plant preparations (g = 0.328, 95% CI: 0.083, 0.573) and pharmaceutical cannabinoids (g = 0.292, 95% CI: 0.069, 0.515) showed comparable effects. CBD dosages ranged from 17.5 mg to 600 mg per day, with no significant correlation between dosage and effect size (ρ = -0.014, p = 0.963). Mild to moderate side effects were reported, but no serious adverse events. Risk of bias assessment ranged from low (n = 3) to high (n = 5).Conclusion While meta-analysis of effect sizes for primary outcomes revealed modest positive effects, particularly for autism spectrum disorders, the current evidence remains insufficient to broadly recommend cannabinoids for treating mental disorders in youth populations. Larger, controlled studies with standardized outcomes are needed to establish definitive clinical recommendations.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Published
2024-12-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48620/84518
Primary Topic
Cell Image Analysis Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cannabinoids for treating psychiatric disorders in youth: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Cell Image Analysis Techniques
article

Cannabinoids for treating psychiatric disorders in youth: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

article en

Abstract

Background Cannabinoids have been of increasing interest mainly due to their putative efficacy in a wide array of psychiatric, psychosomatic, and neurological conditions.Aims This systematic review aims to synthesize results from randomized placebo-controlled trials regarding the efficacy and the dosage of cannabinoids as therapeutics in psychiatric disorders in children, adolescents, and young adults.Methods All publications up to June 30th, 2024, were included from PubMed and Embase. Eligibility criteria in accordance with the PRISMA-guidelines was applied. RCTs providing pre- and post-treatment parameters on cannabinoid therapies for mental disorders in comparison to controls in an age range from 0 to 25 years were included. Effect sizes were calculated as Hedges' g for primary outcomes, and a multilevel random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to account for dependent outcomes from same study populations.Results We identified 7603 records, of which 8 independent clinical trials (reported in 9 publications) met the pre-established eligibility criteria, comprising 474 unique participants (245 treatment, 229 control). Analysis of 13 primary outcomes (of 7 clinical trials) revealed a modest positive overall effect for symptom improvement or normalization of brain physiology (Hedges' g = 0.308, 95% CI: 0.167, 0.448). Autism spectrum disorder studies showed the most consistent evidence (g = 0.264, 95% CI: 0.107, 0.421), while other conditions showed wider confidence intervals. Age-stratified analysis showed that adult populations (mean age 23.3 years, n = 5 outcomes) demonstrated higher effect sizes (g = 0.463, SD = 0.402) compared to pediatric populations (mean age 11.8 years, n = 8 outcomes; g = 0.318, SD = 0.212). Whole plant preparations (g = 0.328, 95% CI: 0.083, 0.573) and pharmaceutical cannabinoids (g = 0.292, 95% CI: 0.069, 0.515) showed comparable effects. CBD dosages ranged from 17.5 mg to 600 mg per day, with no significant correlation between dosage and effect size (ρ = -0.014, p = 0.963). Mild to moderate side effects were reported, but no serious adverse events. Risk of bias assessment ranged from low (n = 3) to high (n = 5).Conclusion While meta-analysis of effect sizes for primary outcomes revealed modest positive effects, particularly for autism spectrum disorders, the current evidence remains insufficient to broadly recommend cannabinoids for treating mental disorders in youth populations. Larger, controlled studies with standardized outcomes are needed to establish definitive clinical recommendations.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (US), Pain Clinic of India (IN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Cell Image Analysis Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.