MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393013047 · doi:10.1186/s12889-024-18356-6

Benzodiazepine use in medical cannabis authorization adult patients from 2013 to 2021: Alberta, Canada

2024· article· en· W4393013047 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cerina Dubois, Heidi V.J. Fernandes, Mu Lin, Karen J. B. Martins, Jason R.B. Dyck, Scott Klarenbach, Lawrence Richer, Ed Jess, John G. Hanlon, Elaine Hyshka, Dean T. Eurich

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCollege of Physicians and Surgeons of OntarioAlberta Health ServicesSt. Michael's HospitalAlberta HealthUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaGovernment of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
KeywordsCannabisMedicineBenzodiazepinePrior authorizationMedical cannabisAuthorizationBiostatisticsPharmacyEpidemiologyPsychiatryInternal medicineFamily medicinePharmacologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines are a class of medications that are being frequently prescribed in Canada but carry significant risk of harm. There has been increasing clinical interest on the potential "sparing effects" of medical cannabis as one strategy to reduce benzodiazepine use. The objective of this study as to examine the association of medical cannabis authorization with benzodiazepine usage between 2013 and 2021 in Alberta, Canada. METHODS: A propensity score matched cohort study with patients on regular benzodiazepine treatment authorized to use medical cannabis compared to controls who do not have authorization for medical cannabis. A total of 9690 medically authorized cannabis patients were matched to controls. To assess the effect of medical cannabis use on daily average diazepam equivalence (DDE), interrupted time series (ITS) analysis was used to assess the change in the trend of DDE in the 12 months before and 12 months after the authorization of medical cannabis. RESULTS: Over the follow-up period after medical cannabis authorization, there was no overall change in the DDE use in authorized medical cannabis patients compared to matched controls (- 0.08 DDE, 95% CI: - 0.41 to 0.24). Likewise, the sensitivity analysis showed that, among patients consuming ≤5 mg baseline DDE, there was no change immediately after medical cannabis authorization compared to controls (level change, - 0.04 DDE, 95% CI: - 0.12 to 0.03) per patient as well as in the month-to-month trend change (0.002 DDE, 95% CI: - 0.009 to 0.12) per patient was noted. CONCLUSIONS: This short-term study found that medical cannabis authorization had minimal effects on benzodiazepine use. Our findings may contribute ongoing evidence for clinicians regarding the potential impact of medical cannabis to reduce benzodiazepine use. HIGHLIGHTS: • Medical cannabis authorization had little to no effect on benzodiazepine usage among patients prescribed regular benzodiazepine treatment in Alberta, Canada. • Further clinical research is needed to investigate the potential impact of medical cannabis as an alternative to benzodiazepine medication.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research→French-language works237,207→