Protocol for a feasibility study investigating the UCalgary’s <i>Cannabis Café</i> : education and harm reduction initiative for postsecondary students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction High rates of cannabis consumption among emerging adults in Canada represent an important public health issue. As part of the legalisation of cannabis, health objectives were established by the Government of Canada including reducing risky patterns of consumption and cannabis related harm among vulnerable populations. Despite these ambitions, few evidenced based education programmes have been evaluated in the literature. The aim of this study is to describe and evaluate the acceptability of a novel harm reduction and education initiative titled, UCalgary’s Cannabis Café . The Cannabis Café incorporates components shown to be effective in reducing risky substance consumption on campuses and substance related stigma. An important objective of the Café is the dissemination of methods to reduce risk in the form of Canada’s Lower-Risk Cannabis Use Guidelines. Methods and analysis The study will take the form of a non-experimental, observational cohort design, where participants will be asked to complete four surveys (baseline, immediate follow-up, 1 month and 3 months). The primary outcomes of the study will be the feasibility of the initiative including acceptability and implementation. Secondary outcomes include knowledge uptake of methods to reduce risk of cannabis related harm, descriptive cannabis norms and changes in cannabis consumption. Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (#REB18-1364). The investigators will develop a guideline outlining the Cannabis Café to assist in the replication of this initiative at other locations and publish the results from the study in a peer-reviewed manuscript.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.066 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.118 | 0.033 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".