Marijuana Use and the Risk of Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/603629
Title:
Marijuana Use and the Risk of Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Author:
Gentry, James
Affiliation:
The University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix
Issue Date:
25-Mar-2016
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the College of Medicine - Phoenix, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Collection Information:
This item is part of the College of Medicine - Phoenix Scholarly Projects 2016 collection. For more information, contact the Phoenix Biomedical Campus Library at pbc-library@email.arizona.edu.
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Abstract:
Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the evidence pertinent to the relationship between marijuana use and depression and perform a meta‐analysis on the data in order to inform evidenced‐based practice. The question of interest is: Is marijuana use associated with increased risk of developing depression? Methods: The databases MEDLINE (PubMed), The Cochrane Library, CINAHL (EBSCO), psycINFO, and Google Scholar were searched for the topics of marijuana use and depression through October of 2013. Studies were included if they were systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, or case‐control studies. No randomized controlled trials were discovered. Quality of cohort and case‐control studies was evaluated using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale 1. Overall quality of evidence was determined using the GRADE methodology 2,3. The Bradford‐Hill criteria 4 were used to assess for causation. Studies were assessed by two reviewers. 173 articles were screened for eligibility. Of these fourteen articles were considered to fit the inclusion criteria. Nine homogeneous studies were included in the meta‐analysis. Results: The quality of the evidence reviewed is low to very low. It does not meet Bradford‐Hill criteria for causation. There is a slight positive correlation between marijuana use and onset of depression. However, those studies included in the meta‐analysis demonstrated a low overall pooled odds ratio (OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.06—1.29). Conclusion: The evidence suggests a slight positive correlation between marijuana use and depression but is not sufficient to draw a conclusion. This evidence is generally of very low quality. It does not demonstrate a dose response, and is without a significant magnitude of effect.
MeSH Subjects:
Cannabis; Depression; Meta-Analysis as Topic
Description:
A Thesis submitted to The University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Medicine.
Mentor:
Campos‐Outcalt, Doug MD, MPA

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.titleMarijuana Use and the Risk of Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysisen_US
dc.contributor.authorGentry, Jamesen
dc.contributor.departmentThe University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenixen
dc.date.issued2016-03-25en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the College of Medicine - Phoenix, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item is part of the College of Medicine - Phoenix Scholarly Projects 2016 collection. For more information, contact the Phoenix Biomedical Campus Library at pbc-library@email.arizona.edu.en_US
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.description.abstractObjective: To conduct a systematic review of the evidence pertinent to the relationship between marijuana use and depression and perform a meta‐analysis on the data in order to inform evidenced‐based practice. The question of interest is: Is marijuana use associated with increased risk of developing depression? Methods: The databases MEDLINE (PubMed), The Cochrane Library, CINAHL (EBSCO), psycINFO, and Google Scholar were searched for the topics of marijuana use and depression through October of 2013. Studies were included if they were systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, or case‐control studies. No randomized controlled trials were discovered. Quality of cohort and case‐control studies was evaluated using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale 1. Overall quality of evidence was determined using the GRADE methodology 2,3. The Bradford‐Hill criteria 4 were used to assess for causation. Studies were assessed by two reviewers. 173 articles were screened for eligibility. Of these fourteen articles were considered to fit the inclusion criteria. Nine homogeneous studies were included in the meta‐analysis. Results: The quality of the evidence reviewed is low to very low. It does not meet Bradford‐Hill criteria for causation. There is a slight positive correlation between marijuana use and onset of depression. However, those studies included in the meta‐analysis demonstrated a low overall pooled odds ratio (OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.06—1.29). Conclusion: The evidence suggests a slight positive correlation between marijuana use and depression but is not sufficient to draw a conclusion. This evidence is generally of very low quality. It does not demonstrate a dose response, and is without a significant magnitude of effect.en
dc.typeThesisen
dc.subject.meshCannabisen
dc.subject.meshDepressionen
dc.subject.meshMeta-Analysis as Topicen
dc.descriptionA Thesis submitted to The University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Medicine.en
dc.contributor.mentorCampos‐Outcalt, Doug MD, MPAen
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.