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

    Clinical Research Repository

    Cannabis Clinical Evidence

    A curated, continually-updated repository of peer-reviewed cannabis research — graded by the BoC Evidence Strength rubric and contextualised by our editorial team.

    1,199Studies indexed
    37Grade A · Strong evidence
    9Conditions covered
    1 MayLast updated
    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.

    194 of 1,199 studies
    Condition
    Methodology
    Evidence grade
    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.
    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.