Prescribing medicinal cannabis to children and young people: general practitioner perspectives in Australian primary care

This study aims to explore how Australian general practitioners understand and navigate prescribing medicinal cannabis to children and young people (aged 25 years and under).

Prescribing in this age group has increased in recent years. Medicinal cannabis remains an unapproved therapy accessed through Special Access Scheme pathways, and high-quality evidence on long-term safety in paediatric and adolescent populations is limited.

The study will explore GPs' perspectives on this evolving area of practice, including how they interpret available evidence, consider risks and benefits, and understand their clinical and governance responsibilities. Participants may have experience prescribing medicinal cannabis or encounter it through shared care, patient enquiries, or coordination with other services.

Data will be collected in two stages. First, Australian GPs will complete an online survey exploring views and experiences of medicinal cannabis prescribing in younger populations. Survey findings will identify broad patterns. Second, approximately 12-20 survey participants who indicate their willingness to be interviewed will be invited to participate in semi-structured interviews via Zoom, telephone, or face-to-face. Interviews will last approximately 45-60 minutes and, with consent, will be audio recorded. For Zoom interviews, the University of Melbourne platform will be used. No video recordings will be retained. Recordings and transcripts will be securely stored in University of Melbourne research environments and de-identified. Written study information will be provided in advance, with written or recorded verbal consent obtained before

Risks are low. Participants may experience mild professional discomfort when discussing clinical uncertainty or differing care models. No identifiable patient information will be requested. Participants may decline questions or withdraw at any time without consequence.

There are no direct benefits to participants. However, findings may improve understanding of GP perspectives on safety, evidence, and clinical governance and inform future clinical guidance, education, and policy discussions in primary care.