SUMMIT European Cannabis Insights Summit 2026 — Exclusive industry intelligence Register Now
EVENT Cannabis Europa London 2026 — Europe's cannabis industry unites Get Tickets

Recent Searches

    Popular Searches

    • Glass Pharms
    • medical
    • Medical Cannabis
    • Cannabis Health Symposium
    • Kanabo Calls in Administrators
    • Article
    • antiflamx near me abbotsford bc
    • teaching feeling scene
    • for driving licence test
    • LEADER AM

    Recent Searches

      Popular Searches

      • Glass Pharms
      • medical
      • Medical Cannabis
      • Cannabis Health Symposium
      • Kanabo Calls in Administrators
      • Article
      • antiflamx near me abbotsford bc
      • teaching feeling scene
      • for driving licence test
      • LEADER AM
      Clinical Research Repository

      Cannabis Clinical Evidence

      A curated, continually-updated repository of cannabis research and trials — graded by the BoC Evidence Strength rubric, mapped on the evidence landscape, and contextualised by our editorial team.

      1,242Studies & trials
      3%Grade A · Strong
      9Conditions covered
      5Trials in progress
      17 JunLast updated
      The Evidence Landscape

      Every study, plotted by strength & recency

      Higher = stronger evidence · further right = more recent · larger = bigger sample · ringed = active trial. Use the filters below to highlight a slice.

      Cannabis evidence landscape — publication year (x) vs evidence strength 0–100 (y), bubble size = sample size, colour = grade A B C D 0 20 40 60 80 100 2002 2006 2010 2014 2018 2022 2026 Publication year → Evidence strength →
      A B C D Trial Bubble size = sample size

      Showing the 800 most recent of 1,242 graded records.

      BoC Evidence Strength

      A transparent rubric, not a marketing badge.

      A

      Strong evidence

      Meta-analysis or large RCT, peer-reviewed, recent and replicated.

      B

      Moderate evidence

      Peer-reviewed RCT or sizeable cohort, recent.

      C

      Limited evidence

      Smaller-scale or older work, or methodology with known limitations.

      D

      Emerging evidence

      Preprints, pre-clinical work, case series — useful but provisional.

      114 of 1,242 studies
      Condition
      Methodology
      Evidence grade
      Browse by Condition

      Where the evidence is strongest — and where it isn’t

      Anxiety

      218 studies

      Cardiology

      128 studies

      Epilepsy

      123 studies

      Inflammation

      112 studies

      Neurology

      103 studies

      Oncology

      156 studies

      Pain

      203 studies

      PTSD

      81 studies

      Sleep

      94 studies
      Methodology Primer

      What each study type can — and can’t — tell you

      A statistical synthesis combining results from multiple independent studies. Sits at the top of the evidence hierarchy because it draws on the largest pooled sample and minimises single-study bias.
      A structured, reproducible literature review against pre-specified inclusion criteria. Sometimes pairs with a meta-analysis, sometimes presents narrative synthesis.
      Participants are randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. The gold standard for primary causal inference in clinical research.
      A defined group of participants is followed over time to observe outcomes. Strong for prospective questions but susceptible to confounding.
      Compares people with a condition to matched controls without it. Efficient for rare outcomes; vulnerable to recall bias.
      A snapshot of a population at one point in time. Useful for prevalence and association but cannot establish causality.
      Describes outcomes from a small number of patients. Useful for hypothesis generation and rare presentations; not designed to support generalisable conclusions.
      In vitro or animal-model research. Important for mechanism but has not yet been validated in humans.
      From the Newsroom

      BoC reporting on clinical research

      Frequently Asked

      How the repository works

      Each study receives a BoC Evidence Strength grade — A through D — calculated from four factors: study methodology, sample size, peer-review status, and recency / replication. The full rubric is published openly so editors and clinicians can audit any verdict.
      The repository indexes peer-reviewed work alongside preprints. Each study card flags its peer-review status, and that status feeds directly into the Evidence Strength score.
      The repository is an editorial summary of published research, not a substitute for clinical judgment. Use it to find primary sources quickly, then read the original publications and consult applicable clinical guidelines before making decisions.
      Studies are sourced primarily from PubMed (NCBI E-utilities) and curated by the BoC editorial team. Each entry is reviewed before publication and re-checked daily for retractions or corrections.
      New studies are added on a rolling basis as the editorial team identifies them. Existing entries are resynced daily against PubMed to surface retractions, corrections, and updated metadata.
      Yes — every study page includes one-click citation export in APA, Vancouver, BibTeX, and RIS formats.
      Free Weekly Briefing

      Cannabis news, every Monday morning.

      Industry intelligence for cannabis operators, regulators, clinicians, and investors — sent every Monday.