ArticleJournal of cannabis research2022
Validity between self-report and biochemical testing of cannabis and drugs among patients with traumatic injury: brief report.
Article in Journal of cannabis research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cannabis use and glutamate across the psychosis spectrum: in vivo evidence from 7T proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Article
- Inhaled Cannabis, Asthma, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study of n = 379,049.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Cannabis Use and Glutamate across the Psychosis Spectrum: In Vivo Evidence from 7T Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy.Research square · 2025Article
- Observational studies of exposure to tobacco and nicotine products: Best practices for maximizing statistical precision and accuracy.iScience · 2025Review
- Cigarette smoking status and COVID-19 hospitalization in the context of cannabis use: An electronic health record cohort study in northern California.Addictive behaviors reports · 2024Article
- Association of Cannabis Use With Cardiovascular Outcomes Among US Adults.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Prevalence, Perceptions, and Patterns of Cannabis Use Among Cardiac Inpatients at a Tertiary-Care Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Survey.CJC open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe relationship between drug use and traumatic injury is well documented, yet only a small proportion of patients are biochemically tested for cannabis and other substances. The study objective was to determine whether patient self-report can be used as a proxy for biochemical drug testing following traumatic injury.
methodsThis study was a secondary analysis that included 320 patients admitted to four level I trauma centers in Colorado and Texas, primarily involved in motor vehicle crash (89%). If performed, biochemical testing was collected via urine toxicology screen ("tox screen") for cannabis, amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine, opiates, PCP, and benzodiazepines. All patients were screened for self-reported current drug use, which was evaluated for any drug and specifically for cannabis use. Analyses used to compare results of self-reported drug use and tox screen included sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values, and percent agreement.
resultsAmong 320 patients, 23% (n = 75) self-reported drug use; cannabis was the most frequently reported drug (n = 63). A tox screen was performed in 59% of patients (n = 190); the proportion of patients who had a tox screen was similar for those self-reporting drug use (60.0%) to those who denied using drugs (59.2%), p = 0.90. Among patients who had a tox screen performed, 18% (n = 35) tested positive for any drug, 12% (n = 22) tested positive for THC, and 7% (n = 13) tested positive for opiates. The percent agreement was 80% for any drug and 81% for cannabis. The specificity was 84-85%, indicating a high likelihood that a patient will not have a positive tox screen if they do not report using drugs. Negative predictive values were 90-95%, indicating a negative self-report correctly identified nearly all patients testing negative on tox screen. Sensitivity was only 60% and positive predictive values were 30-47% for cannabis and drugs, respectively.
conclusionThese findings may negate the need for biochemical drug testing in this population, particularly as a "rule out" based on self-reporting. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings and should address risk of selection bias.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.