Clinical Takeaway
Current evidence on cannabinoids in pediatric medicine spans 276 studies across multiple designs, with the strongest data coming from interventional and observational research on plant-derived and pharmaceutical cannabinoid treatments. The literature supports medical cannabinoid use in select pediatric conditions, though the field continues to evolve and this living review will update as new data emerge. Clinicians should weigh available safety and efficacy data carefully when considering cannabinoid therapies for patients under 18.
#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 for cannabinoid safety and efficacy in pediatric populations, addressing a critical gap in clinical knowledge as cannabinoid use in children increases without sufficient high-quality evidence. The systematic mapping of safety data is particularly clinically relevant given the developing pediatric brain’s vulnerability to cannabinoid exposure and the need for evidence-based prescribing guidelines in conditions like intractable epilepsy and chemotherapy-induced nausea. By maintaining a living format, this review will allow clinicians to access evolving evidence in real-time, improving clinical decision-making and reducing reliance on anecdotal reports in a therapeutically important but understudied pediatric population.
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 provides a timely synthesis of cannabinoid safety and efficacy data in pediatric populations, addressing a critical knowledge gap as clinical interest in cannabis-based medicines for children continues to grow. The authors’ commitment to continuous updating is commendable given the rapidly evolving evidence base, though clinicians should recognize that the included studies likely span heterogeneous populations, dosing regimens, cannabinoid formulations, and outcome measures, which limits direct comparability and generalizability to individual patients. Publication bias toward positive outcomes, variable quality of included studies, and the relative scarcity of high-quality randomized controlled trials in pediatrics remain important confounders when interpreting reported benefits. Additionally, the lack of long-term developmental and safety data in children means we cannot yet fully characterize risks beyond the study periods examined. When considering cannabinoid therapy for pediatric patients, clinicians should use this review as a foundation for understanding current evidence while maintaining appropriate clinical skepticism, ensuring informed consent conversations with families include both potential benefits and
| |
Have thoughts on this? Share it:
