MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283395755 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxac019

How are Canadian cannabis dispensaries counselling breastfeeding consumers?

2022· article· en· W4283395755 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shikha Kuthiala, Shamini Selvakumar, Sophie Vincent, Vasilia Vastis, Alina Zgardau, Alison K. Shea

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispensaryCannabisBreastfeedingMedicineFamily medicinePsychiatryPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: This study aimed to identify recommendations given to breastfeeding individuals by Canadian cannabis dispensary employees, since the legalization of recreational cannabis in 2018. Methods: This was a nationwide cross-sectional study conducted from November 2020 to January 2021. A mystery caller approach was used to identify recommendations given to breastfeeding individuals seeking a product for "relaxation." This study was modelled on similar studies which assessed recommendations given to pregnant women looking for cannabis products to manage nausea and vomiting (Vastis V, Shea AK, Vincent S, Metz TD. 275: Are canadian cannabis dispensaries counselling pregnant women appropriately? Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020;222: S187.(Abst). Lusero I, Paltrow LM, Rosenbloom N. Recommendations from cannabis dispensaries about first-trimester cannabis use Obstet Gynecol 2018;132:781-2.). The primary outcome was the recommendation of a cannabis product. Secondary outcomes included stated benefits of cannabis, recommended discussion with health care provider, length of call, rationale for recommendation, and reported source of information on which the recommendation was based. Results: The majority (79.4%) of employees of the 714 Canadian dispensaries contacted recommended against a cannabis product for "relaxation" while breastfeeding. The recommendations from dispensary employees were often (80%) provided without a specific reason, whereas a minority referenced published research (2%) and opinion (17.6%). Cannabis products were rarely (3.3%) classified as safe in breastfeeding. Approximately 76.6% of dispensary employees recommended contacting a health care provider, while 2.4% recommended against. Conclusions: Although a high proportion of dispensary employees recommended against using a cannabis product during lactation, there were still 20.6% that did recommend use, which contrasts the current public health guidelines and is not supported by the paediatric and obstetric societies. These findings highlight the need for further education about the safety of cannabis products while breastfeeding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research→French-language works237,207→