• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在向加拿大消费者销售大麻的网站上提供的健康信息质量很差。

The quality of health information provided on web sites selling cannabis to consumers in Canada is poor.

机构信息

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, Michael G. DeGroote Centre for Learning and Discovery, McMaster University, Room 2112, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.

出版信息

Harm Reduct J. 2022 Dec 12;19(1):138. doi: 10.1186/s12954-022-00691-9.

DOI:10.1186/s12954-022-00691-9
PMID:36503517
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9743698/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is used by millions of people for both medical and recreational purposes, and this use is even greater in jurisdictions where it is legalized, such as Canada. Online cannabis vendors have gained popularity for purchasing cannabis due to easy access and convenience to consumers. The objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of health information provided by web sites of cannabis vendors selling products to Canadian consumers and to further identify trends in the information provided.

METHODS

Six different searches were conducted on Google.ca, and the first 40 webpages of each search were screened for eligibility. A total of 33 unique web sites of cannabis vendors selling products to Canadian consumers were identified and included. The DISCERN instrument, which consists of 16 questions divided into three sections, was used to evaluate the quality of cannabis-related health information on these web sites.

RESULTS

Across the 33 web sites, the average of the summed DISCERN scores was 36.83 (SD = 9.73) out of 75, and the mean score for the overall quality of the publication (DISCERN question 16) was 2.41 (SD = 0.71) out of 5. Many of these web sites failed to discuss uncertainties in research evidence on cannabis, the impact of cannabis use on quality of life, alternatives to cannabis use, risks associated with cannabis use, and lacked references to support claims on effects and benefits of use.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that the quality of cannabis-related health information provided by online vendors is poor. Healthcare providers should be aware that patients may use these web sites as primary sources of information and appropriately caution patients while directing them to high-quality sources. Future research should serve to replicate this study in other jurisdictions and assess the accuracy of information provided by online cannabis vendors, as this was outside the scope of the DISCERN instrument.

摘要

背景

大麻被数百万人用于医疗和娱乐目的,在合法化的司法管辖区,如加拿大,其使用量更大。在线大麻供应商因其易于消费者获取和方便而受到欢迎,从而购买大麻。本研究的目的是评估向加拿大消费者销售产品的大麻供应商网站提供的健康信息的质量,并进一步确定所提供信息的趋势。

方法

在 Google.ca 上进行了六次不同的搜索,对每个搜索的前 40 个网页进行了筛选,以确定其是否符合条件。共确定了 33 个向加拿大消费者销售产品的大麻供应商的独特网站,并将其包括在内。使用 DISCERN 工具(由 16 个问题组成,分为三个部分)评估这些网站上与大麻相关的健康信息的质量。

结果

在 33 个网站中,DISCERN 总分的平均值为 75 分中的 36.83 分(SD=9.73),总体出版质量(DISCERN 问题 16)的平均得分为 5 分中的 2.41 分(SD=0.71)。许多这些网站未能讨论大麻研究证据中的不确定性、大麻使用对生活质量的影响、替代大麻使用的方法、与大麻使用相关的风险,并且缺乏支持使用效果和益处的参考资料。

结论

我们的研究结果表明,在线供应商提供的大麻相关健康信息的质量很差。医疗保健提供者应该意识到,患者可能会将这些网站用作主要信息来源,并在指导患者时适当警告患者,并引导他们访问高质量的来源。未来的研究应该在其他司法管辖区复制这项研究,并评估在线大麻供应商提供的信息的准确性,因为这超出了 DISCERN 工具的范围。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3367/9743698/efc8e7b806b9/12954_2022_691_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3367/9743698/efc8e7b806b9/12954_2022_691_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3367/9743698/efc8e7b806b9/12954_2022_691_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
The quality of health information provided on web sites selling cannabis to consumers in Canada is poor.在向加拿大消费者销售大麻的网站上提供的健康信息质量很差。
Harm Reduct J. 2022 Dec 12;19(1):138. doi: 10.1186/s12954-022-00691-9.
2
Assessing the quality of information provided on websites selling Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) to consumers in Canada.评估向加拿大消费者出售麻古(Mitragyna speciosa)的网站所提供信息的质量。
Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2021 Mar 19;16(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s13011-021-00361-2.
3
Cannabis for pain: a cross-sectional survey of the patient information quality on the Internet.大麻用于止痛:一项关于互联网上患者信息质量的横断面调查。
J Cannabis Res. 2021 Aug 16;3(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s42238-021-00093-x.
4
The quality of information available about Ephedra sinica on online vendor websites: The Canadian consumer experience.在线供应商网站上关于麻黄的可用信息质量:加拿大消费者的体验。
Complement Ther Med. 2021 Mar;57:102674. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2021.102674. Epub 2021 Jan 27.
5
Evaluating health information provided to kratom consumers by good manufacturing practice-qualified vendors.评估符合良好生产规范资质的供应商向卡痛消费者提供的健康信息。
Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2023 Apr 11;18(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s13011-023-00531-4.
6
Dietary and herbal supplements for weight loss: assessing the quality of patient information online.饮食和草药补充剂减肥:评估在线患者信息质量。
Nutr J. 2021 Jul 27;20(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12937-021-00729-x.
7
Evaluation of the quality of online patient information at the intersection of complementary and alternative medicine and hypertension.补充与替代医学和高血压交叉领域在线患者信息质量评估
Clin Hypertens. 2022 Mar 15;28(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s40885-021-00193-z.
8
Efficacy of natural health products in treating osteoporosis: what is the quality of internet patient advice?天然保健品治疗骨质疏松症的疗效:互联网上患者建议的质量如何?
Ann Pharmacother. 2009 May;43(5):899-907. doi: 10.1345/aph.1L688.
9
Systematic review of internet patient information on colorectal cancer surgery.结直肠癌手术相关互联网患者信息的系统评价。
Dis Colon Rectum. 2014 Jan;57(1):64-9. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000011.
10
Evaluation of information quality on the internet for periodontal disease patients.评价牙周病患者互联网信息质量。
Oral Dis. 2021 Mar;27(2):348-356. doi: 10.1111/odi.13546. Epub 2020 Aug 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluating the Credibility and Reliability of Online Information on Cannabidiol (CBD) for Epilepsy Treatment in Poland.评估波兰在线大麻二酚(CBD)治疗癫痫信息的可信度和可靠性。
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Apr 14;12(8):830. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12080830.
2
Dietary and herbal supplement consumer health information for pain: A cross-sectional survey and quality assessment of online content.饮食和草药补充剂用于疼痛的消费者健康信息:一项在线内容的横断面调查与质量评估
Integr Med Res. 2023 Dec;12(4):100996. doi: 10.1016/j.imr.2023.100996. Epub 2023 Sep 28.
3
Attitudes, Beliefs, and Perceptions on Cannabis Among Older Adults Aged 65 and Older: A cross-sectional Survey.

本文引用的文献

1
Online information on medical cannabis is not always aligned with scientific evidence and may raise unrealistic expectations.关于医用大麻的在线信息并不总是与科学证据一致,可能会引发不切实际的期望。
J Cannabis Res. 2022 Jul 11;4(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s42238-022-00145-w.
2
Sources of Cannabis Information and Medical Guidance for Neurologic Use: NARCOMS Survey of People Living With Multiple Sclerosis.大麻用于神经学用途的信息及医学指导来源:NARCOMS对多发性硬化症患者的调查
Neurol Clin Pract. 2022 Apr;12(2):102-112. doi: 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000001155.
3
Drivers of purchase decisions for cannabis products among consumers in a legalized market: a qualitative study.
65 岁及以上老年人对大麻的态度、信念和看法:一项横断面调查。
J Prim Care Community Health. 2023 Jan-Dec;14:21501319231177284. doi: 10.1177/21501319231177284.
合法市场中消费者对大麻产品购买决策的驱动因素:一项定性研究。
BMC Public Health. 2022 Feb 21;22(1):368. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-12399-9.
4
Facilitators and barriers to the regulation of medical cannabis: a scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature.促进和阻碍医用大麻监管的因素:对同行评议文献的范围综述。
Harm Reduct J. 2021 Oct 14;18(1):106. doi: 10.1186/s12954-021-00547-8.
5
Cannabis for pain: a cross-sectional survey of the patient information quality on the Internet.大麻用于止痛:一项关于互联网上患者信息质量的横断面调查。
J Cannabis Res. 2021 Aug 16;3(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s42238-021-00093-x.
6
Coverage of medical cannabis by Canadian news media: Ethics, access, and policy.加拿大新闻媒体对医用大麻的报道:伦理、准入和政策。
Int J Drug Policy. 2021 Nov;97:103361. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2021.103361. Epub 2021 Jul 10.
7
Attitudes toward medical cannabis among family physicians practising in Ontario, Canada: a qualitative research study.加拿大安大略省家庭医生对医用大麻的态度:一项定性研究
CMAJ Open. 2021 Apr 13;9(2):E342-E348. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20200187. Print 2021 Apr-Jun.
8
Education, Knowledge, and Practice Characteristics of Cannabis Physicians: A Survey of the Society of Cannabis Clinicians.大麻医师的教育、知识和实践特点:对大麻临床医生学会的调查。
Cannabis Cannabinoid Res. 2021 Feb 12;6(1):58-65. doi: 10.1089/can.2019.0025. eCollection 2021.
9
A content analysis of internet information sources on medical cannabis.对医用大麻网络信息来源的内容分析。
J Cannabis Res. 2020 Sep 18;2(1):29. doi: 10.1186/s42238-020-00041-1.
10
Medical Marijuana, Recreational Cannabis, and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.医用大麻、娱乐性大麻与心血管健康:美国心脏协会的科学声明。
Circulation. 2020 Sep 8;142(10):e131-e152. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000883. Epub 2020 Aug 5.