MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942255910 · doi:10.1111/add.14612

Commentary on Terry‐McElrath <i>et al</i>. (2019): Will persistent patterns of youth marijuana use compromise their futures?

2019· letter· en· W2942255910 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kerry M. Green, Amelia M. Arria

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PsychologyDemographyPopulationQuarter (Canadian coin)Sample (material)Monitoring the FutureSuicide preventionInjury preventionMedicinePoison controlEnvironmental healthPsychiatrySubstance abuseGeographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent increases in the prevalence of frequent marijuana use that extend well into adulthood raise concerns about the long-term consequences for population health and for the individuals engaging in these use patterns. With the context of marijuana use changing rapidly and marijuana use prevalence continuing to increase in the United States 1, 2, the public is in great need of rigorous science on the consequences of these trends to guide policymaking. Terry-McElrath and colleagues address this need by answering important questions regarding the continuation of youth marijuana use patterns to age 30 years 3. Using data from the Monitoring the Future Survey, a national school-based sample, they find that more recent cohorts are at the highest risk for continued frequent marijuana use. Moreover, 60% of individuals who use marijuana frequently in high school continue to use marijuana at some level when assessed at age 30, and almost a quarter continued a frequent use pattern. The authors point to decreases in perceived risk, increased tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) potency and changes in the transition to adult roles as possible reasons for these findings. The prevalence of long-term frequent use, however, is probably much greater than this study indicates. The latent classes estimated were identified using data collected during the study participants’ senior year of high school. As mentioned in the limitations 3, this school-based sample excludes those who have dropped out of high school or who do not attend regularly. This exclusion may be a result of marijuana use, as our previous research, and that of others, shows a wide range of academic performance problems associated with frequent marijuana use, including school dropout 4, 5. Moreover, the exclusion might be even greater among vulnerable groups, such as racial minorities, where school dropout is more common 6 and marijuana use is increasing 7. The educational consequences of frequent marijuana use also seem to extend past high school 8. Terry-McElrath et al. find college enrollment and completion are low among frequent adolescent marijuana users 3. Their analyses show that just 23.8% of 12th grade frequent marijuana users graduate college, with an additional 11.3% attending college but not graduating. This compares nationally to approximately 60–70% of high school graduates enrolling in college, depending on the cohort 9. Educational consequences are probably just the beginning of a cascade of negative effects for frequent marijuana users 4, 10. Research has shown that the effects of such use are broad, and affect domains such as social role formation, social relationships, life satisfaction and physical health symptoms, such as sleep and irritability 4, 11-13. Accumulating evidence also shows that marijuana use can precipitate or worsen existing mental health symptoms 14, 15. Interestingly, some of the purported consequences of marijuana use might be the reason for using marijuana in the first place 16. For example, many individuals who use marijuana to sleep or relieve anxiety might unknowingly be alleviating cannabis withdrawal symptoms, which have been recently reported to occur in 12% of frequent users 17. Similarly, although under-researched, it is possible that initiating frequent use at an early age might lead to underdevelopment of adaptive coping strategies for stress and anxiety, which could drive continued use. The sharp increased prevalence of frequent marijuana use in recent cohorts is likely to continue and potentially worsen, considering the high prevalence of this behavioral pattern among current 12th graders, as well as use trajectories that might extend longer during the life-course than previously seen and evidence that relaxed marijuana legislation in the United States may impact the course of adult use 18. Moreover, the view of marijuana as a relatively harmless substance is at odds with mounting scientific evidence and it is unfortunate that public dialogue on the negative impacts of marijuana has not been more pronounced, as these consequences can dim the bright futures of our youth. Terry-McElrath et al. call for greater understanding of the possible broad impacts of long-term patterns of use 3. We propose that a crucial next step for this work is to understand how its findings, along with accumulating evidence of negative consequences from marijuana use, can guide policymaking and public health efforts, as scientists have suggested that marijuana policy has outpaced the science 19. As more states relax their marijuana policies, persistent use and related adverse consequences are likely to continue to grow. Fast-forward to 2031, when today's high school seniors are 30 years old: how prevalent will frequent patterns of use be then; and what will be the impact of these patterns on frequent marijuana users and the rest of society? None. This commentary was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse [NIDA, R01DA042748 (K.M.G.), U01DA040219 (A.M.A.) and R01DA014845 (A.M.A)].

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207