Reconceptualizing cannabis use risks in the context of health and social inequities: Insights from a qualitative study with young people in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cannabis became legal in Canada in 2018. Since then, calls for research to evaluate the impact of legalization on youth have been at the forefront of public and academic discussions. Research addressing these calls has largely focused on issues of risk and harm, with limited attention to the role of social context in shaping youth cannabis use. This paper presents the findings of a study that centered youth perspectives on cannabis use in the context of health and social inequities. METHODS: Between 2021 and 2022, we undertook an exploratory and critical qualitative interview study with 56 youth from across Canada who use cannabis and who reported experiences with health or social struggles, broadly self-defined. Our analysis followed a reflexive thematic approach and leveraged theoretical perspectives from critical drug studies to interrogate youths' variegated cannabis use risks and risk environments, whilst facilitating inquiry into their interface with overlapping forms of hardship and inequity. FINDINGS: We developed three interconnected themes: (i) cannabis use risks as contextually situated; (ii) cannabis use as a practice of care; and (iii) cannabis use as a survival tool in connection with trauma and violence. Findings within and across these themes centre on the nexus of intentionality and agency in youth narratives of using cannabis and situates their cannabis use in connection with, and in response to, intersecting health and social inequities. CONCLUSION: This study underscores opportunities for a reconsideration or reconceptualization of risks in the context of youth cannabis use, so that approaches to supporting youth who use cannabis are more resonant and credible with those who experience health and social inequities. Findings offer direction for youth cannabis policy and programming, including to decenter individual pathology, support harm reduction goals, and further consider relationships between cannabis use and context, marginalization, and oppression.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".