Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35434244›Full record

ArticleAddictive behaviors reports2022

Measuring recent cannabis use across modes of delivery: Development and validation of the Cannabis Engagement Assessment.

Magdalen G Schluter, David C Hodgins

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addictive behaviors reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Magdalen G SchluterDepartment of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada.
David C HodginsDepartment of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada.
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Methods of cannabis engagement have proliferated in recent years, which many self-report measures do not adequately capture. There is a clear need for self-report measures that capture current patterns of cannabis use across a range of methods, and that can be used to track changes over time. The current study developed the Cannabis Engagement Assessment (CEA), a self-report measure of past month cannabis use across dry flower, concentrate, and edible products. Methods: A sample of 349 participants from the undergraduate student population and broader community were recruited. To examine convergent validity of the CEA, participants completed measures of cannabis engagement, cannabis misuse, and use-related problems. To assess divergent validity, participants also completed measures of depression and alcohol use problems. Criterion and test-retest reliability were examined in a subset of 65 participants who re-completed the CEA and a timeline follow-back interview (TLFB). Results: Indicators of cannabis use frequency and quantity showed good convergence with measures of cannabis use patterns, problematic engagement, and cannabis use-related problems. Divergent validity of the CEA was supported by lower associations with alcohol use problems and depression symptoms. The CEA also showed good test-retest reliability and convergence with estimates of frequency and quantity of cannabis use from the TLFB. Conclusions: The CEA is a viable self-report measure of cannabis use that is representative of current patterns of recreational cannabis engagement. Its focus on cannabis use in the preceding 30 days also lends itself to measuring changes in use over time.

Indexed as

CannabisCannabis Engagement Assessment (CEA)Instrument validationScale developmentTest-retest reliability

Identifiers

PMID35434244
PMCPMC9006737
OpenAlexW4210864510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.