The transition of cannabis into the mainstream of Australian healthcare: framings in professional medical publications.

Monique Lewis, John Flood
{"title":"The transition of cannabis into the mainstream of Australian healthcare: framings in professional medical publications.","authors":"Monique Lewis, John Flood","doi":"10.1186/s42238-021-00105-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medicinal cannabis has been legalised for use for a range of specified medical conditions in Australia since 2016. However, the nature of the government regulations and the subsequent complexity of prescribing, as well as doctors' safety uncertainties and the stigma of the plant, remain contributing barriers to patient access. Media representations can offer insights into the nature of the discourse about new medical products and therapies and how ideas and understandings about social phenomena become constructed. Focusing on professional medical publications, this study sought to investigate how medicinal cannabis is being represented in professional medical publications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a content analysis approach, we investigated articles about medicinal cannabis from 2000 to the end of 2019 in the Medical Journal of Australia, Australian Doctor, Medical Observer, Australian Journal of General Practice, Australian Family Physician, and Australian Medicine. Articles were coded according to article type, framings of cannabis, headline and article tone, and key sources used in the article. We also used manifest textual analysis to search for word frequencies, and specific conditions referred to in the articles retrieved.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 117 articles were retrieved for analysis, the majority of which were news stories for a physician audience. Across the longitudinal period, we found that most reports carried a positive tone towards medicinal cannabis. Cannabis is most frequently framed as a legitimate therapeutic option that is complex to prescribe and access, does not have a strong evidence base to support its use, and also carries safety concerns. At the same time, the outlook on cannabis research data is largely positive. Primary sources most frequently used in these reports are peer-reviewed journals or government reports, voices from medical associations or foundations, as well as government and university researchers. Chronic pain or pain were the conditions most frequently mentioned in articles about cannabis, followed by epilepsy, cancer or cancer pain, and nausea and chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This analysis offers evidence that medicinal cannabis is being framed as a valid medicine advocated by the community, with potential for addressing a range of conditions despite the lack of evidence, and a medicine that is not free of risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":15172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cannabis Research","volume":" ","pages":"48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8606098/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cannabis Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-021-00105-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medicinal cannabis has been legalised for use for a range of specified medical conditions in Australia since 2016. However, the nature of the government regulations and the subsequent complexity of prescribing, as well as doctors' safety uncertainties and the stigma of the plant, remain contributing barriers to patient access. Media representations can offer insights into the nature of the discourse about new medical products and therapies and how ideas and understandings about social phenomena become constructed. Focusing on professional medical publications, this study sought to investigate how medicinal cannabis is being represented in professional medical publications.

Methods: Using a content analysis approach, we investigated articles about medicinal cannabis from 2000 to the end of 2019 in the Medical Journal of Australia, Australian Doctor, Medical Observer, Australian Journal of General Practice, Australian Family Physician, and Australian Medicine. Articles were coded according to article type, framings of cannabis, headline and article tone, and key sources used in the article. We also used manifest textual analysis to search for word frequencies, and specific conditions referred to in the articles retrieved.

Results: A total of 117 articles were retrieved for analysis, the majority of which were news stories for a physician audience. Across the longitudinal period, we found that most reports carried a positive tone towards medicinal cannabis. Cannabis is most frequently framed as a legitimate therapeutic option that is complex to prescribe and access, does not have a strong evidence base to support its use, and also carries safety concerns. At the same time, the outlook on cannabis research data is largely positive. Primary sources most frequently used in these reports are peer-reviewed journals or government reports, voices from medical associations or foundations, as well as government and university researchers. Chronic pain or pain were the conditions most frequently mentioned in articles about cannabis, followed by epilepsy, cancer or cancer pain, and nausea and chemotherapy.

Conclusions: This analysis offers evidence that medicinal cannabis is being framed as a valid medicine advocated by the community, with potential for addressing a range of conditions despite the lack of evidence, and a medicine that is not free of risk.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

大麻向澳大利亚主流医疗保健的过渡:专业医学出版物中的框架。
背景:自 2016 年起,澳大利亚将药用大麻合法化,用于治疗一系列特定病症。然而,政府法规的性质和随后处方的复杂性,以及医生对安全性的不确定性和大麻的污名化,仍然是患者使用大麻的障碍。媒体的表述可以让我们深入了解有关新医疗产品和疗法的讨论性质,以及对社会现象的想法和理解是如何构建的。本研究以专业医疗出版物为重点,试图调查专业医疗出版物是如何介绍药用大麻的:采用内容分析法,我们调查了 2000 年至 2019 年底期间《澳大利亚医学杂志》、《澳大利亚医生》、《医学观察家》、《澳大利亚全科医学杂志》、《澳大利亚家庭医生》和《澳大利亚医学》中有关药用大麻的文章。我们根据文章类型、大麻框架、标题和文章基调以及文章中使用的主要资料来源对文章进行了编码。我们还使用了显式文本分析法来搜索检索到的文章中的词频和提及的具体病症:共检索到 117 篇文章用于分析,其中大部分是面向医生受众的新闻报道。在整个纵向期间,我们发现大多数报道都对药用大麻持肯定态度。大麻最常被描述为一种合法的治疗选择,但其处方和获取都很复杂,没有强有力的证据支持其使用,而且还存在安全隐患。与此同时,大麻研究数据的前景基本上是积极的。这些报告中最常使用的主要来源是同行评审期刊或政府报告、医学协会或基金会的声音以及政府和大学研究人员。在有关大麻的文章中,最常提及的病症是慢性疼痛或疼痛,其次是癫痫、癌症或癌症疼痛以及恶心和化疗:本分析报告提供的证据表明,药用大麻正被视为一种由社区倡导的有效药物,尽管缺乏证据,但仍有可能治疗一系列疾病,而且这种药物并非没有风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信