Gender Norms, Roles and Relations and Cannabis-Use Patterns: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, boys and men use cannabis at higher rates than girls and women, but the gender gap is narrowing. With the legalization of recreational cannabis use in Canada and in multiple US states, these trends call for urgent attention to the need to consider how gender norms, roles and relations influence patterns of cannabis use to inform health promotion and prevention responses. Based on a scoping review on sex, gender and cannabis use, this article consolidates existing evidence from the academic literature on how gender norms, roles and relations impact cannabis-use patterns. Evidence is reviewed on: adherence to dominant masculine and feminine norms and cannabis-use patterns among adolescents and young adults, and how prevailing norms can be both reinstated or reimagined through cannabis use; gendered social dynamics in cannabis-use settings; and the impact of gender roles and relations on cannabis use among young adults of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. Findings from the review are compared and contrasted with evidence on gender norms, roles and relations in the context of alcohol and tobacco use. Recommendations for integrating gender transformative principles in health promotion and prevention responses to cannabis use are provided.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".