MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pediatric Hospitalizations for Unintentional Cannabis Poisonings and All-Cause Poisonings Associated With Edible Cannabis Product Legalization and Sales in Canada

2023· article· en· W4315927947 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Daniel T. Myran, Peter Tanuseputro, Nathalie Auger, Lauren Konikoff, Robert Talarico, Yaron Finkelstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Health Forum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityOttawa HospitalInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsCannabisLegalizationMedicinePoisson regressionEnvironmental healthPoison controlDemographyPopulationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Canada legalized cannabis in October 2018 but initially prohibited the sale of edibles (eg, prepackaged candies). Starting in January 2020, some provinces permitted the sale of commercial cannabis edibles. The association of legalizing cannabis edibles with unintentional pediatric poisonings is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate changes in proportions of all-cause hospitalizations for poisoning due to cannabis in children during 3 legalization policy periods in Canada's 4 most populous provinces (including 3.4 million children aged 0-9 years). Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional study included all hospitalizations in children aged 0 to 9 years in Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec between January 1, 2015, and September 30, 2021. Exposures: Prelegalization (January 2015 to September 2018); period 1, in which dried flower only was legalized in all provinces (October 2018 to December 2019); and period 2, in which edibles were legalized in 3 provinces (exposed provinces) and restricted in 1 province (control province) (January 2020 to September 2021). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of hospitalizations due to cannabis poisoning out of all-cause poisoning hospitalizations. Data analysis was performed using descriptive statistics and Poisson regression models. Results: During the 7-year study period, there were 581 pediatric hospitalizations for cannabis poisoning (313 [53.9%] boys; 268 [46.1%] girls; mean [SD] age, 3.6 [2.5] years) and 4406 hospitalizations for all-cause poisonings. Of all-cause poisoning hospitalizations, the rate per 1000 due to cannabis poisoning before legalization was 57.42 in the exposed provinces and 38.50 in the control province. During period 1, the rate per 1000 poisoning hospitalizations increased to 149.71 in the exposed provinces (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 2.55; 95% CI, 1.88-3.46) and to 117.52 in the control province (IRR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.82-5.11). During period 2, the rate per 1000 poisoning hospitalizations due to cannabis more than doubled to 318.04 in the exposed provinces (IRR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.68-2.80) but remained similar at 137.93 in the control province (IRR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.71-1.97). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that following cannabis legalization, provinces that permitted edible cannabis sales experienced much larger increases in hospitalizations for unintentional pediatric poisonings than the province that prohibited cannabis edibles. In provinces with legal edibles, approximately one-third of pediatric hospitalizations for poisonings were due to cannabis. These findings suggest that restricting the sale of legal commercial edibles may be key to preventing pediatric poisonings after recreational cannabis legalization.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations52
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Health ForumSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207