MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6964398167 · doi:10.25384/sage.c.5619293

Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item (GAD-7) Scores in Medically Authorized Cannabis Patients—Ontario and Alberta, Canada

2021· other· en· W6964398167 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyCannabisObservational studyMedical cannabisGeneralized anxiety disorderCohortAnxiety disorderMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ObjectivesDespite increasing rates of legalization of medical cannabis worldwide, the current evidence available on its effect on mental health outcomes including anxiety is of mixed results. This study assesses the effect of medical cannabis on generalized anxiety disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scores in adult patients between 2014 and 2019 in Ontario and Alberta, Canada.MethodsAn observational cohort study of adults authorized to use medical cannabis. The GAD-7 was administered at the time of the first visit to the clinic and subsequently over the follow-up time period of up to 3.2 years. Overall changes in GAD-7 scores were computed (mean change) and categorized as: no change (<1 point); improvement; or worsening—over time.ResultsA total of 37,303 patients had initial GAD-7 scores recorded and 5,075 (13.6%) patients had subsequent GAD-7 follow-up scores. The average age was 54.2 years (SD 15.7 years), 46.0% were male, and 45.6% noted anxiety symptoms at the baseline. Average GAD-7 scores were 9.11 (SD 6.6) at the baseline and after an average of 282 days of follow-up (SD 264) the average final GAD-7 score recorded was 9.04 (SD 6.6): mean change −0.23 (95% CI, −0.28 to −0.17, t[5,074]: −8.19, p-value <0.001). A total of 4,607 patients (90.8%) had no change in GAD-7 score from their initial to final follow-up, 188 (3.7%) had a clinically significant decrease, and 64 (1.3%) noted a clinically significant increase in their GAD-7 scores.ConclusionsOverall, there was a statistically significant decrease in GAD-7 scores over time (in particular, in the 6–12-month period). However, this change did not meet the threshold to be considered clinically significant. Thus, we did not detect clinical improvements or detriment in GAD-7 scores in medically authorized cannabis patients. However, future well-controlled clinical trials are needed to fully examine risks or benefits associated with using medical cannabis to treat anxiety conditions.

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)0.002
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataFrench-language works237,207