The study, published in the journal Frontiers in Oncology, analyzed data from 10,641 peer-reviewed studies— what authors say is more than ten times the number in the next-largest review on the topic. Results "indicate a strong and growing consensus within the scientific community regarding the therapeutic benefits of cannabis," it says, “particularly in the context of cancer.”​

Given what the report calls a “scattered and heterogenous” state of research into the therapeutic potential of marijuana, authors aimed to “systematically assess the existing literature on medical cannabis, focusing on its therapeutic potential, safety profiles, and role in cancer treatment.”​

“We expected controversy. What we found was overwhelming scientific consensus,” lead author Ryan Castle, head of research at Whole Health Oncology Institute, said in a statement. “This is one of the clearest, most dramatic validations of medical cannabis in cancer care that the scientific community has ever seen.”

The meta-analysis “showed that for every one study that showed cannabis was ineffective, there were three that showed it worked,” the Whole Health Oncology Institute said in press release. “That 3:1 ratio—especially in a field as rigorous as biomedical research—isn’t just unusual, it’s extraordinary.” The institute added that the “level of consensus found here rivals or exceeds that for many [Food and Drug Administration]-approved medications.”