The association between physical availability of cannabis retail outlets and frequent cannabis use and related health harms: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An increasing number of regions have or are considering legalising the sale of cannabis for adult use. Experience from tobacco and alcohol regulation has found that greater access to physical retail stores is positively associated with increased substance use and harm. Whether this association exists for cannabis is unclear. We completed a systematic review examining the association between cannabis retail store access and adverse health outcomes. We identified articles up until July 20, 2023 by searching four databases. We included studies examining the association between measures of cannabis store access and adverse outcomes: frequent or problematic cannabis use, healthcare encounters due to cannabis use (e.g., cannabis-induced psychosis), and healthcare encounters potentially related to cannabis (e.g., self-harm episodes). Results were compared by study design type, retail access measure, and by subgroups including: children, adolescents, young adults, adults, and pregnant individuals. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021281788). The search generated 5750 citations of which we included 32 studies containing 44 unique primary analyses (unique retail measure and outcome pairs). Studies come from 4 countries (United States, Canada, Netherlands and Uruguay). Among the included analyses, there were consistent positive associations between greater cannabis retail access and 1) increased healthcare service use or poison control calls directly due to cannabis (10/12 analyses; 83%) (2) increased cannabis use and cannabis-related hospitalization during pregnancy (4/4; 100%) and 3) frequent cannabis use in adults and young adults (7/11; 64%). There was no consistent positive association between greater cannabis retail and increased frequent cannabis use in adolescents (1/4; 25%), healthcare service use potentially related to cannabis (2/6; 33%) or increased adverse neonatal birth outcomes (2/7; 26.8%). There is a positive association between greater cannabis store access and increases in cannabis harm. In countries with legal cannabis, retail restrictions may reduce use and harm. Funding: Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (CCSA).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".