Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36318205›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Validity of the Single-Item Screen-Cannabis (SIS-C) for Cannabis Use Disorder Screening in Routine Care.

Theresa E Matson, Gwen T Lapham, Jennifer F Bobb, Malia Oliver, Kevin A Hallgren, Emily C Williams, Katharine A Bradley

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Safety considerations for patients using cannabis.The mental health clinician · 2025
    Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Cannabis Use Among Older Adults.JAMA network open · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Theresa E MatsonKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Gwen T LaphamKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Jennifer F BobbKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Malia OliverKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Kevin A HallgrenDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle.
Emily C WilliamsKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Katharine A BradleyKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Project-002UG1DA040314 · NIDA · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Ingrid A Binswanger, CYNTHIA I CAMPBELL · 2015 to 2026
$34.9M
NIDA NIH HHS UG1 DA040314
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Cannabis use is prevalent and increasing, and frequent use intensifies the risk of cannabis use disorder (CUD). CUD is underrecognized in medical settings, but a validated single-item cannabis screen could increase recognition. Objective: To evaluate the Single-Item Screen-Cannabis (SIS-C), administered and documented in routine primary care, compared with a confidential reference standard measure of CUD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study included a sample of adult patients who completed routine cannabis screening between January 28 and September 12, 2019, and were randomly selected for a confidential survey about cannabis use. Random sampling was stratified by frequency of past-year use and race and ethnicity. The study was conducted at an integrated health system in Washington state, where adult cannabis use is legal. Data were analyzed from May 2021 to March 2022. Exposures: The SIS-C asks about frequency of past-year cannabis use with responses (none, less than monthly, monthly, weekly, daily or almost daily) documented in patients' medical records. Main Outcomes and Measures: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Composite International Diagnostic Interview-Substance Abuse Module (CIDI-SAM) for past-year CUD was completed on a confidential survey and considered the reference standard. The SIS-C was compared with 2 or more criteria on the CIDI-SAM, consistent with CUD. All analyses were weighted, accounting for survey design and nonresponse, to obtain estimates representative of the health system primary care population. Results: Of 5000 sampled adult patients, 1688 responded to the cannabis survey (34% response rate). Patients were predominantly middle-aged (weighted mean [SD] age, 50.7 [18.1]), female or women (weighted proportion [SE], 55.9% [4.1]), non-Hispanic (weighted proportion [SE], 96.7% [1.0]), and White (weighted proportion [SE], 74.2% [3.7]). Approximately 6.6% of patients met criteria for past-year CUD. The SIS-C had an area under receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-0.96) for identifying CUD. A threshold of less than monthly cannabis use balanced sensitivity (0.88) and specificity (0.83) for detecting CUD. In populations with a 6% prevalence of CUD, predictive values of a positive screen ranged from 17% to 34%, while predictive values of a negative screen ranged from 97% to 100%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this diagnostic study, the SIS-C had excellent performance characteristics in routine care as a screen for CUD. While high negative predictive values suggest that the SIS-C accurately identifies patients without CUD, low positive predictive values indicate a need for further diagnostic assessment following positive results when screening for CUD in primary care.

Indexed as

CannabisMarijuana AbuseSubstance-Related DisordersAdultDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID36318205
PMCPMC9627408
OpenAlexW4307794036

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.