MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224700192 · doi:10.20882/adicciones.1694

Impacto de la legalización del consumo recreativo del cannabis

2022· review· es· W4224700192 on OpenAlex
Manuel Isorna Folgar, Francisco Pascual, Ester Aso, F. Árias

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdicciones · 2022
Typereview
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabisLegislatureRecreationConsumption (sociology)Environmental healthMedicinePolitical sciencePsychiatryLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, there have been important legislative changes in many countries regarding the use of cannabis for medicinal and/or recreational purposes, which have facilitated access to it. Uruguay, Canada and some of the US states are the only jurisdictions that have legalised recreational consumption, applying different legislative models. The aim of this review is to analyse the effects that the legalisation of recreational cannabis has had on its use and its consequences. In general, the evidence accumulated to date indicates that the legalisation of cannabis has been associated with a decrease in the price of the substance, higher concentration of THC (potency), greater diversity of presentations for consumption, lower risk perception and an increase in consumption in adults and moderately in adolescents (even though it is illegal for them to consume), as well as an increase in the adverse consequences derived from cannabis consumption on public health. There has been a decrease in drug-related arrests, but the illegal market continues to be frequently used. No increase in the demand for treatment due to cannabis consumption has been detected. Therefore, these legislative changes have so far failed to achieve their main objectives, which were to suppress the illegal market and protect the most vulnerable groups, while on the contrary, they seem to imply an increase in some of the negative aspects associated with cannabis consumption. However, taking into account that most of these legislative changes have entered into force relatively recently, a longer follow-up period is required to be able to draw definitive conclusions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.338 · 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