MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overlapping patterns of recreational and medical cannabis use in a large community sample of cannabis users

2020· article· en· W3032923076 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueComprehensive Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsImpactHomewood Research InstituteSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabisRecreationPsychiatryMedical cannabisMedicineAnxietyLegalizationDepression (economics)Environmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Regulatory changes are increasing access to both medical cannabis and cannabis in general. As such, understanding patterns of recreational and medical cannabis use is a high public health priority. OBJECTIVES: Patterns of cannabis use (recreational and medical), other substance use, and psychiatric symptoms were characterized in a large sample of community adult cannabis users in Canada, prior to federal cannabis legalization. METHODS: This was a self-report assessment of 709 cannabis users (Mean age = 30.19 (11.82) years; 55.01% female). Patterns of overall substance use and psychiatric symptomatology were compared based on recreational/medical cannabis status. RESULTS: Overall, 61.4% of participants endorsed exclusively recreational use, while 38.6% reported some level of medical use. Of all medical users, only 23.4% reported authorization from a health professional. Recreational cannabis users typically reported infrequent use (less than weekly), whereas medical users modally reported daily use. Compared to recreational users, medical users reported more problematic cannabis use in addition to greater psychiatric symptomatology (anxiety, depression and trauma). Interestingly, a large majority of medical users also reported using recreationally (80.6%), while exclusive medical use was less common (19.3%). This dual motives group reported more daily cannabis use and more alcohol and tobacco use. Compared to medical-only users, individuals using cannabis for both medical and recreational purposes more often used cannabis to treat psychiatric conditions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings reveal the differences in cannabis use patterns and preferences between recreational and medical users, and even within medical users. In particular, dual motives individuals, who use cannabis for both positively and negatively reinforcing purposes, may warrant special attention as a subpopulation.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.274 · 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