MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317780774 · doi:10.1177/11782218221150113

Revealing the Meaning of Cannabis Use as an Occupation: A Scoping Review

2023· review· en· W4317780774 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Guyonnet, Katherine E. Stewart, Jane A. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Abuse Research and Treatment · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)CannabisPsychologySociologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Occupational science and occupational therapy typically perceive occupations as promoting health and well-being. However, this perspective overlooks the many occupations that are viewed as illegal, unhealthy, or risky, such as drug use. Due to its negative association with health, drug use is perceived as not holding significance or meaning in people's lives. Objective: This study explores how individuals perceive and describe the meaning of their cannabis use in the context of their lives, from an occupational perspective. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using Levac et al.' modifications to Arksey and O'Malley's framework. To examine the peer-reviewed literature, 7 databases were searched using terms related to cannabis and meaning. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the selected studies, and reflexive thematic analysis identified cross-study themes. Results: Fourteen studies were selected. Most studies have been published since 2008, with 5 published in the last 2 years. Four themes were identified across the studies: (a) preserving life; (b) navigating the routines of everyday life; (c) understanding the self, identity, and belonging; and (d) expanding the view of the world. Conclusions: Cannabis use was revealed in this study as a support for navigating occupational routines and enhancing occupational repertoires and engagement, feelings of belonging, and collective user identities. As such, substance abuse treatment practices, including those provided by occupational therapists, should recognize the potential significance of cannabis use within people's lives. Using a harm reduction approach, occupational therapists can acknowledge the ways in which clients use cannabis to manage their daily routines, while also focusing on supporting clients to reduce the ill-effects of cannabis. As individuals become more engaged in occupations that are significant in their lives, their need for and meaning of cannabis use may change leading to a possible reduction in its use and a shift in their identity construction.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0230.022
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.596
GPT teacher head0.631
Teacher spread0.035 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Abuse Research and TreatmentSame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207