Beyond struggle: A strengths-based qualitative study of cannabis use among queer and trans youth in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Queer and trans (QT) youth report higher rates of cannabis use than their cisgender and heterosexual peers. Explanations for this have overwhelmingly focused on the difficulties QT youth face, while little research has examined how cannabis use can relate to QT youth's strengths. We sought to explore how cannabis use could be involved in the experiences of QT youth from a strengths-based perspective. METHODS: We conducted a QT youth-led, community-based study composed of 27 semi-structured interviews with QT young adults aged 21-25 years and living in Québec who use(d) cannabis regularly. Through reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2019), we used a strengths-based lens informed by the Minority Strengths Model (Perrin et al., 2020) to explore how cannabis use featured in participants' efforts to survive and thrive. RESULTS: We generated three themes representing how cannabis featured in participants' efforts to survive and thrive. First, cannabis was used to facilitate the production of an authentic QT self, a process that involved self-discovery, introspection, exploration, awareness, and expression. Cannabis supported, accompanied, and/or complicated this process. Second, cannabis use (and non-use) was involved in building QT community and connection, which constituted a crux of participants' wellbeing. Third, cannabis was used to face adversity, such as marginalization, QT oppression, mental health challenges, and structural under-resourcing. This adversity contrasted experiences of QT identities themselves, which were described as a source of joy and pride. CONCLUSION: Our analysis illustrates many ways in which cannabis use (and non-use) features in QT youth's efforts to survive and thrive. As a result, we encourage loved ones, clinicians, researchers and policy makers to adopt a view of QT cannabis use that is expansive and inclusive of QT youth's strengths.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".