Perspectives toward cannabidiol ( <scp>CBD</scp> ) among youth in Early Psychosis Intervention programs: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Cannabis is used by one third of youth in Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) programs and high dose consumption of the primary constituent Δ-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is associated with higher risk for relapse in this group. Cannabidiol (CBD) is a secondary cannabis constituent that may have antipsychotic properties, though its health risks are only beginning to be understood. Little is known about the views of youth in EPI programs toward CBD, including their reasons for use and perceptions of risk. METHODS: This qualitative study used Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis to investigate the perspectives of a sample (n = 15) of cannabis-consuming youth in EPI programs toward CBD. RESULTS: Those who used CBD (n = 13) did so for pain relief, THC substitution, relaxation, social reasons, and sleep enhancement. CBD was perceived to be beneficial for health and wellness, though many consumers were disappointed with its effects. Most believed there were no risks associated with its use or were unaware of any risks, and all believed CBD could be used safely. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should assess THC and CBD consumption patterns, motives for use, and perceptions of risk separately to tailor interventions accordingly. Youth in EPI programs would benefit from education related to the known health risks and benefits associated with this drug. Clinicians in regions where cannabis is regulated should be open to discussing CBD as a safer substitute for THC. The potential for CBD to serve as viable treatment for psychosis requires further study.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".