The question is narrower than it sounds
Chronic pain includes neuropathic, musculoskeletal, inflammatory, cancer-related, and other conditions. Trials also study different THC-to-CBD ratios, synthetic cannabinoids, routes, durations, and outcomes. Combining them under one label can hide clinically important differences.
The 2025 AHRQ living review focuses on comparative studies lasting at least four weeks. Its framework separates formulation types and evaluates both benefit and harm rather than treating cannabis as one intervention.
What the reviews suggest
For selected adults and selected formulations, reviews have found small short-term improvements in pain or function. Dizziness, sedation, and nausea can increase, and evidence about longer-term benefit, dependence, withdrawal, and serious harms remains limited.
A statistically detectable average difference may still be smaller than the change an individual considers worthwhile. Results from regulated trial products should not be generalized to products with unknown composition.
How to use this evidence
This evidence does not establish cannabis as a universal substitute for established pain care. A clinician can consider the pain diagnosis, other treatments, medicines, mental-health history, driving and workplace risks, and the law that applies to the patient.