Cannabis use regimens in trauma-exposed individuals: Associations with cannabis use quantity and frequency
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
• PRN and PRN+ cannabis use regimens made up most regimens used by trauma-exposed cannabis users (52.1 % and 39.4 %, respectively), while RS regimens only made up 8.5 %. • 100 % (9/9) of individuals who began as RS users moved on to a regimen that included PRN use (PRN or PRN+). • The largest proportion of the sample began and remained as PRN users (40.2 % of the total sample or 52.7 % of those who were originally PRN users (37/70)). • Those using cannabis with both PRN-only and PRN+ regimens used cannabis significantly more often per month than those using with RS regimens. • No significant differences were found between any of the regimens by dose per occasion. People with trauma histories have an increased odds of cannabis use. Little is known about the frequency or consequences of different cannabis use regimens in cannabis users with trauma histories. Individuals with anxiety disorders tend to administer benzodiazepines in a pro re nata (PRN; i.e., as needed) as opposed to regularly scheduled (RS, e.g., twice daily [BID], three times daily [TID]) manner. Although physicians tend to prescribe benzodiazepines on a PRN regimen to minimize use, this regimen is paradoxically associated with greater use levels. Indeed, PRN administration regimens may increase use via negative reinforcement processes. We extended this older benzodiazepine literature to cannabis by examining regimen of cannabis use among 94 trauma-exposed cannabis users (mean age = 35.1 years; 52.1 % male; 23.4 % with cannabis prescription). Participants reported their initial and current cannabis use regimen (PRN vs. RS vs. both [‘PRN+’]) and their past month cannabis use frequency (use occasions in last month) and quantity (grams/use occasion). Consistent with patterns in benzodiazepine research, PRN (47.1 % of sample) and PRN+ (43.5 % of sample) were more common than RS regimens (9.4 % of sample). Also consistent with patterns seen with benzodiazepines, our sample moved toward PRN regimens from initial to current use: e.g., 100 % of initial RS users switched to a regimen that included PRN use. Consistent with predictions emerging from learning theory, PRN and PRN+ cannabis users reported significantly higher cannabis use frequencies compared to RS users ( p ’s < 0.01). Unexpectedly, there were no significant differences between cannabis use regimen groups for quantity of cannabis/occasion. While limited by their cross-sectional nature, with longitudinal replication, result may have implications for identifying cannabis use regimens that minimize frequency of use and thereby reduce risk for negative health outcomes.
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) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».