MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416070312 · doi:10.1186/s13011-025-00680-8

Public support of and attitudes toward decriminalization of possession of illegal drugs among the general population in British Columbia

2025· article· en· W4416070312 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sameer Imtiaz, Cayley Russell, Farihah Ali, Tara Elton‐Marshall, Sean Patenaude, Jürgen Rehm

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDecriminalizationPossession (linguistics)PopulationCriminalizationHealth psychologyPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Decriminalization of possession of illegal drugs was implemented in British Columbia, Canada for a three-year period starting from January 31, 2023. As public sentiment played a large role in the outcome of a similar reform in Oregon, United States, it is important to examine the public’s perceptions of this policy. We examined public support of and attitudes toward decriminalization. METHODS: Data were from an online, non-probability, cross-sectional survey of adults who spoke English and resided in British Columbia (N = 1,202; March to April 2024). One item assessed support of decriminalization, and ten items assessed attitudes toward decriminalization. The analytical strategy involved descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: In regards to support of decriminalization, 41% did not support decriminalization, 26% were neutral or not sure about supporting decriminalization and 33% supported decriminalization. The majority agreed that decriminalization will reduce criminalization of drugs (50%) and encourage drug use experimentation (53%). More agreed (44%) than disagreed (28%) that decriminalization made them feel less safe. The majority disagreed that decriminalization will reduce overdoses (55%) and drug-related crimes (50%). Older age was associated with an increased likelihood of not supporting decriminalization compared with being neutral or not sure about supporting decriminalization (OR [95% CI]: 1.97 [1.35 to 2.88] for 40 to 59 years old; 1.89 [1.19 to 3.02] for ≥ 60 years old), and female or another gender was associated with a decreased likelihood of supporting decriminalization compared with being neutral or not sure about supporting decriminalization (0.66 [0.47 to 0.91]). CONCLUSIONS: Public support of decriminalization was not strong, which may be rooted in lack of robust confidence in decriminalization to achieve its goals and increased public safety concerns. These findings necessitate ongoing evaluations of the policy and increasing knowledge mobilization activities to keep the public abreast of the latest developments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Abuse Treatment Prevention and PolicySame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207