Development of an anxiety disorder following an emergency department visit due to cannabis use: a population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is ongoing uncertainty about whether cannabis use increases the risk of developing an anxiety disorder. In this study we estimated the risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder following an emergency department (ED) visit for cannabis use and explored factors associated with increased risk. Methods: We used health administrative data to perform a population-based cohort study of all individuals aged 10-105 years with no previous healthcare visits for anxiety disorders in Ontario, Canada, between January 2008 and March 2019. We compared the risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder in the ED or hospital (primary analysis) or additionally in an outpatient setting (secondary analysis) for individuals with an incident ED visit for cannabis to members of the general population using cumulative incidence functions and cause-specific hazard models adjusted for relevant confounders. Findings: Our study included 12,099,144 individuals aged 10-105 without prior care for an anxiety disorder in the ED or hospital, of which 34,822 (0.29%) had an incident ED visit due to cannabis. Within 3-years of an incident ED visit due to cannabis, 12.3% (n = 4294) of individuals had an incident ED visit or hospitalization for an anxiety disorder-a 3.7-fold (adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 3.69 95% CI 3.57-3.82) increased risk relative to the general population (1.2%). In secondary analysis, further excluding individuals with prior outpatient care for anxiety disorders, 23.6% of individuals with an ED visit due to cannabis had an incident outpatient visit, ED visit, or hospitalization for an anxiety disorder within 3-years compared to 5.6% of individuals in the general population (aHR 3.88 95% CI 3.77-2.99). The risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder was higher in individuals with ED visits for cannabis use compared to the general population across all age and sex strata. However, younger males with ED visits for cannabis use (aHR 5.67 95% CI 5.19-6.21) had a greater risk relative to the general population than younger women with cannabis use (aHR 3.22 95% CI 2.95-3.52). Interpretation: ED visits for cannabis use were associated with an increased risk of having an incident healthcare visit for an anxiety disorder, particularly in young males. These findings have important clinical and policy implications given the increasing use of cannabis over time and trend towards legalization of cannabis. Funding: Canadian Institutes for Health Research.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".