Youth perception of difficulty accessing cannabis following cannabis legalization and during the early and ongoing stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: repeat cross-sectional and longitudinal data from the COMPASS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Very little research has examined how perceptions of cannabis access among underage youth in Canada have changed since cannabis was legalized and since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, this paper examines the effect of the early and ongoing stages of the COVID-19 pandemic period on youth perceptions of cannabis access over time since the onset of the Cannabis Act in 2018 in a large sample of Canadian youth. METHODS: Using data from the COMPASS study (T1:2018/19, T2:2019/20, T3:2020/21), we used both repeat cross-sectional data [T1 (n = 38,890), T2 (n = 24,109), and T3 (n = 22,795)] to examine overall trends in perceptions of cannabis access, and sequential cohort longitudinal data [n = 4,677 students linked from T1 to T3] to examine the differential changes in perceptions of cannabis access among students over time. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional sample, the frequency of students reporting that cannabis was easy to access decreased by 26.7% from T1 (51.0%) to T3 (37.4%), although respondents who have used cannabis were more likely to report access was easy. In the longitudinal sample, perceptions of cannabis access being easy increased over time, especially among cannabis users. Perceived ease of access appears to have been slightly impeded during the initial pandemic period but rebounded during the ongoing pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: While the prevalence of youth reporting that cannabis is easy to access has declined since legalization and throughout the early and ongoing pandemic periods, a substantial number of underage youth continue to report that cannabis is easy to access. This suggest that there is an ongoing need for continued cannabis control efforts to address this issue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".