<p>Recent systematic reviews, including a Cochrane review, have concluded that the certainty of evidence supporting the use of cannabis-based medicines for chronic neuropathic pain remains low. While this overall conclusion is reasonable, its interpretation warrants careful scrutiny. In this commentary, key methodological and interpretative aspects relevant to the appraisal of this evidence base are examined, with particular attention to the application of the GRADE framework, clinical heterogeneity, outcome selection, and indirectness. It is proposed that inconsistent or insufficiently transparent application of methodological criteria may influence how results are interpreted and communicated, with potential implications for clinical decision-making. A cautious, consistent, and context-aware interpretation of the available evidence is essential to avoid both overstatement and undue dismissal of therapeutic effects in a complex and heterogeneous condition such as neuropathic pain.</p>