Cannabis Research Has a Sex Problem — And Here's How to Fix It | Research

The takeaway

Only 6 of 29 studies found sex differences in cannabis's cognitive effects, but the field's male-centered methods may be hiding real differences that better-designed research would reveal.

Cannabis researchers, research methodologists, sex/gender-in-medicine advocates, funding agencies

What the researchers found

A systematic review found just 6 of 29 human studies showed sex differences in acute cognitive cannabis effects. The commentary identifies four key methodological problems: inadequate statistical power for interaction analyses, poor definition and measurement of sex, no consideration of sex-related variables (hormones, body composition), and complete exclusion of transgender and gender-diverse individuals.

Why it matters

If cannabis affects men and women differently — and emerging evidence suggests it does — then research that's underpowered or poorly designed for detecting sex differences is missing clinically important information that could change how cannabis is prescribed and used.

The numbers in context

6 of 29 studies found sex differences. Key limitations: inadequate power for interactions, poor sex measurement, no sex-related variables (hormones, body composition), zero inclusion of transgender/gender-diverse participants.

How the study worked

Commentary building on a systematic review of 29 studies examining sex differences in acute cognitive effects of cannabis, analyzing methodological limitations and proposing research priorities.

What this study cannot tell us

Commentary format limits scope. The absence of sex differences in most studies could reflect true similarity rather than methodological failure. Proposed research agenda is aspirational without funding commitments.

How to read the evidence

Expert commentary based on systematic review identifies critical methodological gaps but doesn't provide new empirical evidence.

When this study was published

Published 2026, calling for modernized sex-and-gender-informed cannabis research.

The bigger picture

Cannabis medicine cannot be truly evidence-based if half the population's experience is inadequately studied. The call for intersectional, hypothesis-driven research represents a necessary evolution in how we study this substance.

Questions still open

Would adequately powered studies reveal more sex differences? How do menstrual cycle hormones affect acute cannabis response? Should cannabis dosing guidelines differ by sex? How does gender identity intersect with biological sex effects?

Common questions

Does cannabis affect men and women differently?

We don't actually know well — most cannabis research has centered male participants, and studies that do include both sexes are typically not powered to detect differences. Only 6 of 29 studies found sex differences, but that may reflect poor methods rather than true similarity.

Why hasn't this been studied better?

Historical male-centering in drug research, inadequate sample sizes for interaction analyses, failure to measure sex-related variables like hormones and body composition, and complete exclusion of transgender and gender-diverse individuals have all contributed to this gap.

Read the original research

Sex differences in the acute effects of cannabis: the need for hypothesis-driven research.

Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN, 51, 1-8

View on PubMed ↗Publisher’s paper ↗

Citation

Matheson, Justin; Behzad, Danial; Galea, Liisa A M; Di Ciano, Patricia. (2026). Sex differences in the acute effects of cannabis: the need for hypothesis-driven research.. Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN, 51, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1139/jpn-2025-0164