Clinical Takeaway
Cannabinoids have been studied across a range of pediatric medical conditions, with evidence drawn from interventional trials, observational studies, and patient surveys. The current body of research supports cautious clinical consideration of cannabinoid therapies in children, particularly where conventional treatments have fallen short. Safety and efficacy data continue to evolve, and this living review framework ensures findings remain current as new evidence emerges.
#2 Cannabinoids for Medical Purposes in Children: A Living Systematic Review.
Citation: Chhabra Manik et al.. Cannabinoids for Medical Purposes in Children: A Living Systematic Review.. Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992). 2025. PMID: 40437694.
Design: 5 Journal: 0 N: 2 Recency: 2 Pop: 3 Human: 1 Risk: 0
This living systematic review establishes a continuously updated evidence base on cannabinoid safety and efficacy in pediatric patients, addressing a critical knowledge gap as clinical use expands without robust pediatric safety data. The comprehensive mapping of existing literature across multiple databases provides clinicians with current evidence to inform prescribing decisions and identify priority areas for rigorous pediatric trials. By maintaining real-time synthesis of emerging evidence, this framework enables evidence-based clinical practice in a rapidly evolving therapeutic domain where pediatric-specific data remain limited.
Methodological Considerations:
- Small sample — underpowered for subgroup analysis
Abstract: AIM: We developed a living systematic review (LSR) that will continuously map the safety and reported benefit data related to cannabinoid use for medical purposes in children. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2023. Studies involving at least one child 20% studies) in studies enrolling children were somnolence, diarrhoea, vomiting, and decreased appetite. CONCLUSION: These findings will continue to be updated to inform practice and reveal knowledge gaps for future research.
🧬 This living systematic review represents a necessary effort to synthesize the sparse pediatric cannabinoid evidence base, yet clinicians should recognize that the 37,189 citations screened likely yielded a relatively modest number of actual pediatric studies, reflecting how limited the rigorous data remains outside specialized domains like childhood epilepsy. The heterogeneity of cannabinoid products, dosing regimens, and measured outcomes across included studies complicates direct comparisons and generalizability, while publication bias may overrepresent favorable findings in this emerging field. Additionally, the exclusion of mechanistic animal studies and the challenge of disentangling cannabinoid effects from confounding variables such as underlying disease severity, concurrent medications, and family expectations all warrant caution in interpretation. Until more controlled pediatric trials are completed, practitioners should view cannabinoid use in children as a potentially evidence-supported option primarily for well-established indications like refractory epilepsy, while remaining transparent with families about the gaps in safety and efficacy data for other