Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35451615›Full record

ArticlePsychopharmacology2022

Remote detection of Cannabis-related impairments in performance?

James G Phillips, Rowan P Ogeil

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychopharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

James G PhillipsPsychology Department, Auckland University of Technology, Akoranga Campus, Auckland, 0627, New Zealand. jphillip@aut.ac.nz.
Rowan P OgeilEastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Box Hill, Clayton, 3128, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleResearchers have traditionally studied the effects of psychoactive drugs such as Cannabis in controlled laboratory settings or relied on retrospective self-reports to measure impairment. However, advances in technology afford opportunities to conduct assessments remotely.

objectivesWe considered whether objective click-stream data (time and number of clicks spent on a webpage) during an online survey could supplement self-reports of substance use problems.

methodsThe clickstream data of participants (n = 236) were examined as they completed an online study which included validated psychometric tests (Cannabis Use Disorders Identification Test-Revised, Grit-O, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, and Brief Self Control Scale). Clickstream data were compared to self-reported Cannabis use.

resultsPeople reporting Cannabis use within the last 4 weeks required more time and more clicks to complete the online survey, and this was specifically associated with reported frequency of use, duration of impairment, and problems with memory and concentration. Longer amounts of time and more clicks on the online questionnaire were associated with more recent Cannabis use rather than demographic factors or stimulant use.

conclusionsThese results imply clickstream data remotely detected indecision or other deficits associated with previous Cannabis use.

Indexed as

CannabisHallucinogensMarijuana AbuseSubstance-Related DisordersAnalgesicsCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsHumansRetrospective StudiesSelf ReportAnalgesicsCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsHallucinogensCannabisClickstreamImpulsivityIndecisionMobile phones

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.