Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms and cannabis use after 1 year among students of the i-Share cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cannabis use in university students is associated with academic achievement failure and health issues. The objective of the study was to evaluate the association between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms and cannabis use after 1 year among students according to previous cannabis use. Methods Students in France were recruited from February 2013 to July 2020 in the i-Share cohort. 4,270 participants were included (2,135 who never used cannabis at inclusion and 2,135 who did). The Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) was used to assess ADHD symptoms at inclusion. Cannabis use frequency was evaluated 1 year after inclusion. Multinomial regressions were conducted to assess the association between inclusion ADHD symptoms and cannabis use after 1 year. Results Increase in ASRS scores was linked with a greater probability to use cannabis after 1 year and to have a higher cannabis use frequency (once a year—once a month adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.24 (1.15–1.34), more than once a month adjusted OR: 1.43 (1.27–1.61)). Among participants who never used cannabis at inclusion, this association disappeared (once a year—once a month adjusted OR: 1.15 (0.95–1.39), more than once a month adjusted OR: 1.16 (0.67–2)) but remained in participants who ever used cannabis at inclusion (once a year—once a month adjusted OR: 1.17 (1.06–1.29), more than once a month adjusted OR: 1.35 (1.18–1.55)). Conclusions High levels of ADHD symptoms in students could lead to continued cannabis use rather than new initiations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".