Still Dazed and Confused: Demographic Drift and the Persistence of Sampling Bias in Cannabis Research

Cannabis use has shifted dramatically over the past two decades, with the fastest growth occurring among adults aged 65 and older. The clinical trial, neuroimaging, inflammation, and psychiatric outcome literatures on cannabis have not kept pace with this change. This narrative review argues that cannabis research suffers from both dimensions of a Dual Diversity problem: a population diversity deficit, in which study samples remain skewed toward young, healthy, often university-recruited participants relative to actual users, and heterogeneity suppression, in which a demographically varied user population is analyzed as a single, uniform exposure group. This mismatch is traced across five domains. A documented clinical trial diversity gap has been quantified but not yet addressed. Patients using cannabis for neurological disease and chronic pain self-medicate ahead of an evidence base built for a different population. Neuroimaging studies of older-adult cohorts report divergent structural findings that may reflect participant and exposure heterogeneity, among other possible explanations. Inflammatory and endocannabinoid physiology change with age in ways young-skewed samples rarely capture. Psychosis-risk research remains concentrated in adolescence despite implications for older, more recent initiates. The review closes with concrete recommendations, including population-benchmarked reporting, age-stratified enrollment modeled on ICH E7, heterogeneity-preserving analysis, and a minimum exposure descriptor set.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Life
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/life16101712
Primary Topic
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Still Dazed and Confused: Demographic Drift and the Persistence of Sampling Bias in Cannabis Research

Thorsten Rudroff
Life
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
article

Still Dazed and Confused: Demographic Drift and the Persistence of Sampling Bias in Cannabis Research

Thorsten Rudroff
article en

Abstract

Cannabis use has shifted dramatically over the past two decades, with the fastest growth occurring among adults aged 65 and older. The clinical trial, neuroimaging, inflammation, and psychiatric outcome literatures on cannabis have not kept pace with this change. This narrative review argues that cannabis research suffers from both dimensions of a Dual Diversity problem: a population diversity deficit, in which study samples remain skewed toward young, healthy, often university-recruited participants relative to actual users, and heterogeneity suppression, in which a demographically varied user population is analyzed as a single, uniform exposure group. This mismatch is traced across five domains. A documented clinical trial diversity gap has been quantified but not yet addressed. Patients using cannabis for neurological disease and chronic pain self-medicate ahead of an evidence base built for a different population. Neuroimaging studies of older-adult cohorts report divergent structural findings that may reflect participant and exposure heterogeneity, among other possible explanations. Inflammatory and endocannabinoid physiology change with age in ways young-skewed samples rarely capture. Psychosis-risk research remains concentrated in adolescence despite implications for older, more recent initiates. The review closes with concrete recommendations, including population-benchmarked reporting, age-stratified enrollment modeled on ICH E7, heterogeneity-preserving analysis, and a minimum exposure descriptor set.

LifeVol. 16(10)
Turku University Hospital (FI), Turku PET Centre (FI)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
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.