The Effect of Age of Initiation of Cannabis Use on Psychosis, Depression, and Anxiety among Youth under 25 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to review the current state of evidence on the association between age of initiation of cannabis use and symptoms of psychosis, depression, or anxiety among youth under 25 years of age. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of articles published prior to March 2018 by searching OVID MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and the references of included studies. We included comparative studies (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional) that reported on cannabis use in persons <25 years of age (exposure) and symptoms of psychosis, depression, or anxiety (outcome). We narratively synthesized the studies according to design (cohort, etc.) and psychiatric outcome. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: Of the 534 citations identified through the literature search, 23 met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. With psychosis as the outcome, all except one study found that earlier cannabis use was generally associated with higher risks. With depression/anxiety as the outcome, 6 of the 11 included studies reported findings indicating that earlier use of cannabis was linked to higher symptom levels. CONCLUSION: In persons <25 years old, greater cannabis use is associated with more psychological symptoms, especially among those with a predisposition or existing vulnerability to such outcomes (Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine level 3 or 4). Policy makers need to consider the adverse effects of cannabis use in youth when planning a public health approach to cannabis legalization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".