Understanding youth and young adult cannabis use in Canada post-legalization: a scoping review on a public health issue
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Canada legalized recreational cannabis in 2018, and one of the primary objectives of the Cannabis Act was to protect youth by reducing their access to cannabis and providing public education. Canada has the highest prevalence of cannabis use worldwide, particularly among youth and young adults under the age of 25. Cannabis use is linked with many adverse effects for youth and young adults including psychosis, anxiety, depression, respiratory distress, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, and impaired cognitive performance. Despite the high prevalence of cannabis use and the evolution of policies in Canada and globally, significant knowledge and research gaps remain regarding youth and young adult cannabis use. The aim of this scoping review is to map the extent, nature, and range of evidence available on youth and young adult cannabis use in Canada since its legalization, in order to strengthen policies, services, treatments, training, and public education strategies. METHODS: Using a scoping review framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley, along with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we conducted a rigorous search in five academic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection. We included empirical studies that collected data in Canada after the legalization of recreational cannabis (October 2018) and focused on youth or young adults < 30. Two reviewers independently screened articles in two stages and extracted relevant information from articles meeting the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Of the 47 articles meeting our inclusion criteria, 92% used quantitative methods, 6% were qualitative, and 2% used a mixed-methods approach. Over two-thirds (68%) used secondary data. These studies were categorized into six focus areas: (1) prevalence, patterns, and trends, (2) cannabis-related injuries and emergency department (ED) visits, (3) rates and patterns during the pandemic, (4) perceptions of cannabis use, (5) prevention tools, and (6) cannabis-related offenses. Key findings from the studies reviewed include an increase in cannabis use among 18-24-year-olds post-legalization, with mixed results for youth under 18. ED visits for intentional and unintentional cannabis-related injuries have increased in young children and teens. Perception studies show a mix of concern and normalization of cannabis use. Though limited, prevention studies are promising in raising awareness. A decline in cannabis-related offenses was noted by one study. The review highlights several research gaps, including the need for more qualitative data, disaggregation of demographic data, intervention research, and comprehensive studies on the physical and mental health impacts of cannabis use among youth and young adults. CONCLUSION: Maintaining a public health approach is critical, with a focus on reducing the high prevalence of cannabis use among youth and young adults. This involves implementing prevention strategies to minimize harms, enhancing public education, minimizing commercialization, reducing youth access to cannabis, promoting guidelines for lower-risk cannabis use and harm reduction strategies, and increasing training for healthcare providers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».