Telehealth Plus Mobile Monitoring for Cannabis Use Disorder: MOMENT-V Pilot Trial Launches in Young Adults
| Audience | Young adults with cannabis use disorder, parents, primary care clinicians, addiction medicine specialists, and behavioral health researchers |
| Primary Topic | A pilot randomized controlled trial protocol testing a telehealth-plus-mobile-health intervention for cannabis use disorder in young adults |
| Source | Read the full source |
Telehealth Plus Mobile Monitoring for Cannabis Use Disorder: MOMENT-V Pilot Trial Launches in Young Adults
A newly published protocol describes a 60-participant pilot trial testing MOMENT-V, a telehealth motivational-therapy-plus-mobile-monitoring intervention for cannabis use disorder in young adults treated in primary care. The study has not yet reported outcomes; it establishes the design for testing feasibility ahead of a larger efficacy trial.
| Study Type | Protocol for a 2-arm, parallel-group pilot randomized controlled trial (not yet completed) |
| Registry | ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06661031 |
| Planned Enrollment | 60 participants, randomized 1:1 |
| Population | Primary care patients aged 18-26 with CUDIT-R score of 12 or higher, using cannabis 3+ days/week |
| Setting | Primary care clinics in eastern Massachusetts |
| Intervention Arm | MOMENT-V: 2 telehealth motivational enhancement therapy sessions plus 14-day mobile ecological momentary intervention |
| Comparator | Enhanced usual care (EUC) |
| Primary Outcomes | Intervention feasibility (completion, EMI engagement, acceptability) and trial feasibility (screening, eligibility, enrollment, retention rates) |
| Enrollment Window | Began August 2025; projected complete January 2027 |
| Data Collection Complete | Projected July 2027 |
| Results Expected | First half of 2028 |
| Journal | JMIR Research Protocols |
| Published | August 20, 2026 |
| PMID / DOI | 42622852 / 10.2196/105908 |
| Major Limitation | This is a feasibility protocol; no efficacy or outcome data yet exist |
Researchers registered and published the protocol for MOMENT-V, a pilot randomized controlled trial comparing a telehealth-plus-mobile-health intervention to enhanced usual care in 60 young adults with cannabis use disorder recruited from primary care.
The trial is currently enrolling. Recruitment began in August 2025, and results are not expected until 2028.
The intervention pairs two telehealth motivational enhancement therapy sessions, one week apart, with 14 days of ecological momentary intervention: brief mobile surveys and supportive messages triggered by a participant’s own personal cannabis-use triggers.
Participants assigned to enhanced usual care meet once with a counselor to review their CUDIT-R results and receive a resource list, without the telehealth counseling or mobile monitoring components.
With only 60 participants, the study is explicitly designed to test feasibility, completion, engagement, acceptability, and recruitment and retention, not to detect a treatment effect. A sample size calculation for efficacy was not performed because that is not this study’s purpose.
Preliminary efficacy measures such as days of cannabis use and cannabis use disorder symptom counts will be collected, but the authors describe these explicitly as preparation for, not a substitute for, a future fully powered efficacy trial.
The protocol builds on an earlier open pilot study (14 participants) of an in-person version of the intervention, in which participants rated the counseling highly and reported higher confidence to change cannabis use and reduced use frequency by two-month follow-up.
That earlier signal is uncontrolled and single-arm, and it used a different delivery format, in-person rather than telehealth, so it cannot predict how the randomized, fully remote MOMENT-V trial will perform.
The protocol includes defined safety thresholds, such as heavy alcohol use, other illicit substance use, or driving soon after using a psychoactive substance, that trigger notification of a participant’s primary care clinician without disclosing specific survey responses.
The study was approved by an institutional review board, is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, and follows CONSORT and SPIRIT reporting guidelines for trial protocols.
Cannabis use disorder among young adults has grown alongside rising cannabis potency and legalization, while treatment receipt has remained very low, an access gap that primary-care-based digital interventions are increasingly being tested to address.
Ecological momentary intervention and telehealth-delivered motivational approaches have each shown promise individually in prior research. This trial is among the efforts testing whether combining them in a brief, primary-care-embedded format is feasible before a larger efficacy trial is attempted.
This protocol is worth watching, not citing as evidence yet. It describes a thoughtfully designed, ethically reviewed pilot trial addressing a real problem: how underused digital tools are for the roughly 97% of young adults with cannabis use disorder who never receive outpatient treatment.
Until the trial reports outcomes in 2028, clinicians and patients should treat MOMENT-V as an intervention under investigation, not an established treatment option, and should continue to rely on existing evidence-based approaches to cannabis use disorder in the meantime.
How to Read a Trial Protocol Paper
Protocol papers describe how a trial will be conducted before it produces results. They are published for transparency and peer scrutiny of the design, not to report findings.
Reading a protocol as if it were a results paper is one of the most common ways clinical research gets overstated in public discussion.
Four distinctions that matter
Protocol versus results
This paper describes planned methods, outcomes, and benchmarks. It contains no participant data on whether the intervention worked.
Feasibility versus efficacy
The trial’s primary aim is whether the intervention can be delivered and completed as designed, not whether it reduces cannabis use.
Open pilot versus randomized comparison
The supportive 14-participant open-pilot data lacked a comparison group and used a different, in-person format.
Registration versus validation
IRB approval and ClinicalTrials.gov registration confirm ethical and procedural rigor, not that the intervention is effective.
The Same Evidence Can Mean Different Things Depending on the Question Being Asked
Patients, clinicians, caregivers, policymakers, and careful readers may face different practical questions. These perspectives examine what the evidence means for each audience without extending it beyond what the sources support.
This Is Not Yet a Proven Treatment
A pilot trial testing this telehealth-plus-app approach is enrolling now, but it has not reported whether it reduces cannabis use.
Young adults seeking care today should discuss established treatment options with a clinician rather than wait for this trial’s results, expected around 2028.
A Feasibility Study Worth Following, Not Prescribing From
The trial’s rigorous design, validated measures, and defined benchmarks make it worth tracking as it reports feasibility data.
It cannot yet inform treatment recommendations because no efficacy outcomes exist.
Protocol Publication Is Not Proof of Concept
Publishing a protocol confirms only that a trial has been designed and approved, not that the intervention works.
The supportive open-pilot data (14 participants) are the kind of small, uncontrolled signal that regularly fails to replicate in randomized comparisons.
Small, Unblinded, and Feasibility-Focused by Design
With 60 participants and no blinding of condition, the trial is not designed or powered to detect a treatment effect.
Self-reported outcomes, including cannabis use days and satisfaction ratings, may be influenced by participants’ awareness of their assigned condition.
Builds on a Small, Promising In-Person Pilot
An earlier open pilot of an in-person version of the intervention (14 participants) reported high satisfaction and reduced cannabis use at two-month follow-up.
That single-arm result does not establish that the fully remote, randomized MOMENT-V trial will show similar patterns.
What Clinicians Can Do Now
Primary care clinicians in Massachusetts treating young adults with cannabis use disorder may see this trial as a future referral option once it is validated.
Until then, screening with tools like the CUDIT-R and referring to existing evidence-based behavioral treatment and motivational interviewing resources remains the appropriate course.
A Fully Powered Efficacy Trial Would Follow
The authors state explicitly that a larger trial will be warranted only if this pilot demonstrates that the intervention and remote trial procedures are feasible.
Future work should report completion, engagement, and retention benchmarks transparently, including if the pilot does not meet its feasibility targets.
Addressing a Real Treatment Access Gap
Fewer than 3% of young adults with past-year cannabis use disorder receive outpatient treatment, an access gap this protocol is designed to help close if proven feasible.
Policy and coverage decisions about digital cannabis use disorder interventions should wait for feasibility and, later, efficacy data rather than adopting the model preemptively.
Join the Conversation
Have a question about how this applies to your situation? Ask Dr. Caplan
Want to discuss this topic with other patients and caregivers? Join the forum discussion
Frequently Asked Questions
What is MOMENT-V?
MOMENT-V is a telehealth-plus-mobile-health intervention for young adults with cannabis use disorder. It combines two telehealth motivational enhancement therapy sessions with 14 days of mobile ecological momentary intervention.
Has this trial reported any results yet?
No. This is a study protocol describing the trial design. Enrollment began in August 2025, and results are not expected until the first half of 2028.
Who is eligible to participate?
Primary care patients aged 18 to 26 with a CUDIT-R score of 12 or higher and cannabis use on 3 or more days per week, recruited from clinics in eastern Massachusetts.
What does the comparison group receive?
Participants assigned to enhanced usual care meet once with a counselor to review their cannabis use disorder screening results and receive a list of local and national treatment resources.
What is the trial trying to determine?
Primarily feasibility: whether participants complete the intervention, engage with the mobile surveys, find it acceptable, and whether the remote trial procedures achieve target screening, enrollment, and retention rates.
Does the trial test whether MOMENT-V reduces cannabis use?
It collects preliminary efficacy measures, including days of cannabis use, negative consequences, and cannabis use disorder symptoms, but the authors describe these as preparation for a future, fully powered efficacy trial, not as this trial's primary purpose.
Why does the study only enroll 60 participants?
The sample size was chosen to estimate feasibility benchmarks, such as an 80% retention target, with reasonable precision. A larger efficacy-focused sample size calculation was not performed because efficacy is not this pilot's goal.
What supports confidence in this approach?
An earlier open pilot of an in-person version of the intervention (14 participants) found high satisfaction and reduced cannabis use at two-month follow-up, though that was an uncontrolled, single-arm result.
What safety protections are built into the trial?
Defined safety thresholds, such as heavy alcohol use or driving soon after substance use, trigger notification of the participant's primary care clinician without revealing specific survey answers, and the protocol was approved by an institutional review board.
When will we know if MOMENT-V works?
The authors project completing enrollment by January 2027, data collection by July 2027, and reporting primary outcomes, including on ClinicalTrials.gov, by the first half of 2028.
