Harm reduction interventions for young people with first-episode psychosis who continue to use cannabis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: In young people with a first episode of psychosis (FEP), cannabis use is widespread and associated with a significantly worsened prognosis. Few cannabis-specific interventions for this population have been evaluated; most have focused on ceasing or reducing cannabis use, and none are considered highly effective in addressing cannabis use. For many young people with FEP who use cannabis, abstinence-focused approaches may be unappealing or unrealistic options potentially impacting intervention engagement or outcomes. Harm reduction interventions, which seek to reduce cannabis use-related harms rather than requiring abstinence, may present an appealing alternative to young people with FEP who continue using cannabis; few interventions have implemented this approach. Further, there is a scarcity of studies documenting preferences of young people with FEP for cannabis harm reduction interventions or evaluating cannabis harm reduction interventions in this population. Aims: This thesis aims to (a) synthesize the evidence on efficacy of preventive interventions focusing on cannabis use for people with psychosis (review); (b) determine the preferences of young people with FEP using cannabis in relation to key characteristics of cannabis harm reduction interventions (survey); and (c) describe the development of a technology-based harm reduction intervention for young people with FEP who use cannabis, and its associated pilot trial (protocol). Methods: Three studies were conducted. Review: Six databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions aiming to reduce cannabis use-related harms or prevent cannabis use disorder in people with psychosis. Two independent reviewers assessed eligible studies for effectiveness and reporting quality. Intervention effectiveness was described by assessing cannabis-related harms and use outcomes. Survey: A survey, combining two discrete choice experiments (DCE) and conventional survey methodology, was developed to document preferences for cannabis harm reduction interventions. This survey was administered to 89 youth in Canada having FEP and using cannabis. One DCE focused on core attributes of harm reduction interventions (DCE 1) and the second on attributes of boosters (DCE 2). We analyzed these using mixed ranked-ordered logistic regression models. Conventional survey questions on preferences were analyzed using summary statistics. Protocol: A brief, technology-based cannabis harm reduction intervention for young people with FEP using cannabis, called the Cannabis Harm- reducing App to Manage Practices Safely (CHAMPS), was developed to complement FEP standard care. A pilot RCT aiming to recruit 100 young people with FEP and using cannabis was designed to assess the intervention acceptability and the feasibility of conducting a full-scale trial in this population and with this intervention. Results: Review: Five studies were assessed, none of which measured cannabis use-related harms or demonstrated clear efficacy in reducing cannabis use in young people with psychosis. All studies had high risk of bias. Survey: Preferred characteristics for cannabis-focused harm reduction interventions (DCE 1) were: shorter sessions; less frequent sessions; shorter interventions; and technology-based interventions. Preferences for post-intervention boosters (DCE 2) included opting into boosters and having shorter boosters. Protocol: The protocol describing the development of CHAMPS and its pilot RCT was published; the pilot RCT is currently underway. Significance: Few cannabis-specific interventions for young people with FEP have been conducted, none demonstrating clear efficacy or focusing on harm reduction outcomes. Survey findings suggest an interest in cannabis harm reduction interventions and highlight preferred characteristics of young people with FEP for cannabis harm reduction interventions. These findings can guide the design of cannabis harm reductions interventions, as with CHAMPS. CHAMPS represents a novel cannabis harm reduction intervention for young people with FEP who use cannabis, and its associated pilot RCT has the potential to advance knowledge for scientists regarding acceptability and feasibility of implementing cannabis harm reduction interventions in the cannabis and early psychosis fields.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».