Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31718923›Full record

Observational studyDrug and alcohol dependence2020

Subjective effects of combustible, vaporized, and edible cannabis: Results from a survey of adolescent cannabis users.

Esthelle Ewusi Boisvert, Dayoung Bae, Raina D Pang, Jordan P Davis, Lorraine I Kelley-Quon, Jessica L Barrington-Trimis, Matthew G Kirkpatrick, Stephanie H Chai, Adam M Leventhal

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Intentions matter: How planned and unplanned alcohol and cannabis use influences outcomes.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Associations of mode of administration on cannabis consumption and subjective intoxication in daily life.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Receptor mechanisms underlying the CNS effects of cannabinoids: CBAdvances in pharmacology (San Diego, Calif.) · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Dissecting the role of CBEuropean neuropsychopharmacology : the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Esthelle Ewusi BoisvertDepartment of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Dayoung BaeDepartment of Home Economics Education, College of Education, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Raina D PangDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Jordan P DavisDepartment of Children, Youth, and Families, Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, USC Center for Artificial Intelligence in Society, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Lorraine I Kelley-QuonDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States; Division of Pediatric Surgery, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States; Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Jessica L Barrington-TrimisDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Matthew G KirkpatrickDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Stephanie H ChaiDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Adam M LeventhalDepartment of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States; Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States. Electronic address: adam.leventhal@usc.edu.

Funding

Anhedonia as a Risk Factor and Consequence of Substance UseR01DA033296 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI LEVENTHAL, ADAM MATTHEW · 2012 to 2016
$3.4M
Tobacco Use Treatment Research for Vulnerable PopulationsK24DA048160 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Adam Matthew Leventhal · 2019 to 2026
$1.4M
Understanding Transitions from Vaping to Smoking Across AdolescenceK01DA042950 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI BARRINGTON-TRIMIS, JESSICA LOUISE · 2017 to 2021
$1.0M
NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA042950NIDA NIH HHS K24 DA048160NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA033296
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundData from controlled laboratory experiments in adults indicate that the subjective effects of cannabis vary by administration method (e.g., combustible, vaporized). Whether the subjective effects of cannabis experienced in the natural ecology and among adolescents differ by cannabis administration method is unknown. In this observational study, adolescents' retrospective reports of subjective effects after combustible, edible, and vaporized cannabis use were examined.

methodsStudents from ten public schools in Los Angeles, CA, USA (M[SD] age = 16.1 [.43] years) who reported past 6-month use of combustible, edible, or vaporized cannabis (N = 584) were surveyed on subjective effects experienced after use (yes/no). They were provided with a 12 item self-report checklist of six positive (e.g., relaxed, energetic) and six negative (e.g., drowsy, lazy) subjective effects. For each method of administration, affirmative responses were summed in positive (range: 0-6) and negative (range: 0-6) effect composite scores.

resultsGeneralized estimating equations adjusted for demographics and recent cannabis use revealed a graded pattern of differences in positive subjective effects across products, with highest scores for combustible (M[SD] = 3.98[1.76]), followed by edible (M[SD] = 3.58 [2.04]) and vaporized (M[SD] = 3.11 [2.21]) cannabis (all pairwise cross-product contrasts p < .01). Mean negative effect score was highest for edible (M[SD] = 2.27 [1.95]), followed by combustible (M[SD] = 1.94 [1.66]), and vaporized (M[SD] = 1.34 [1.73]) cannabis, respectively (all pairwise contrasts p < .02).

conclusionAdolescents' reports of subjective effects varied across cannabis administration methods. Combustible cannabis' more desirable subjective effects profile might be indicative of higher abuse liability.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdolescent HealthCannabisFemaleHumansLos AngelesMaleMarijuana UseNebulizers and VaporizersPlants, EdibleRetrospective StudiesSelf ReportStudentsSurveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentsCannabisCombustibleEdibleSubjective effectsVaporized

Identifiers

PMID31718923
PMCPMC10408718

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.