MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045883804 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0236243

“Something that actually works”: Cannabis use among young people in the context of street entrenchment

2020· article· en· W3045883804 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Braedon Ronald Paul, Madison Thulien, Rod Knight, M‐J Milloy, Ben Howard, Scarlett Nelson, Danya Fast

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of British ColumbiaHospital for Sick ChildrenMichael Smith Health Research BCVancouver FoundationAustralian Government
KeywordsCannabisContext (archaeology)Young adultMedicineGeographyGerontologyPsychiatryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cannabis is one of the most widely used substances among vulnerable young people (<26 years of age) experiencing street entrenchment. Although previous research has documented the role cannabis can play in harm reduction, substance use and mental health treatment and pain management, this research has predominantly been quantitative and focused on adult drug-using populations. Little qualitative work has examined how young people who use drugs understand, experience, and engage with cannabis in the context of street entrenchment and drug use trajectories that include the use of other substances such as alcohol, opioids and crystal methamphetamine (meth). METHODS: Semi-structured, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted between 2017 and 2019 with 56 young people recruited from a cohort of street-involved youth in Vancouver, Canada. We also conducted 13 interviews with 12 youth-focused care providers across the same time period. Interview data were triangulated by drawing on the findings of a program of anthropological research conducted by the senior author since 2008. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The vast majority of study participants engaged in daily, intensive cannabis use at the same time as they cycled on and off other substances that were perceived as much more harmful (primarily alcohol, fentanyl, heroin and meth). While most participants derived significant pleasure from the use of cannabis, no participants in our study described using cannabis for purely recreational purposes. A number of participants explicitly framed cannabis as a form of mental health and substance use treatment that was more effective and "healthier" than the long-term use of psychopharmaceuticals and medication-assisted substance use treatment (e.g., opioid agonist therapies). Cannabis use was also understood to ameliorate some of the harms of, or even facilitate transitions out of, periods of street-based homelessness. While the majority of our participants highlighted the positive effects of regular cannabis consumption, some described how intensive cannabis use could generate significant harms. CONCLUSION: In the context of the recent legalization of non-medical cannabis use in Canada and amid ongoing overdose and housing crises, it is imperative that future policy and programming interventions and provider education and training be responsive to the ways in which vulnerable youth in our setting are actively using cannabis to navigate their everyday lives and healthcare needs.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations48
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207