Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37314807›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Association of Mandatory Warning Signs for Cannabis Use During Pregnancy With Cannabis Use Beliefs and Behaviors.

Sarah C M Roberts, Claudia Zaugg, M Antonia Biggs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cannabis Use during Pregnancy: An Update.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Sarah C M RobertsAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, Oakland.
Claudia ZauggAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, Oakland.
M Antonia BiggsAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, Oakland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: As states have legalized recreational cannabis use, some have enacted policies mandating point-of-sale warning signs with information on harms of using cannabis during pregnancy. While research has found such warning signs are associated with increased adverse birth outcomes, reasons why are unclear. Objective: To examine whether exposure to cannabis warning signs is associated with cannabis-related beliefs, stigma, and use. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from a population-based online survey conducted from May to June 2022. Participants included pregnant and recently pregnant (within past 2 years) members of the national probability KnowledgePanel and nonprobability samples in all US states and Washington, the District of Columbia, where recreational cannabis is legal. Data were analyzed from July 2022 to April 2023. Exposure: Living in 1 of 5 states with a warning signs policy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were self-reported beliefs (linear) that cannabis use during pregnancy is not safe, should be punished, and is stigmatized and cannabis use during pregnancy (dichotomous). Regressions, accounting for survey weights and clustering by state, examined associations of warning signs with cannabis-related beliefs and use. Results: A total of 2063 pregnant or recently pregnant people (mean [SD] weighted age, 32 [6] years) completed the survey, and 585 participants (weighted, 17%) reported using cannabis during their pregnancy. Among people who used cannabis during their pregnancy, living in a warning signs state was associated with beliefs that cannabis use during pregnancy was safe (β = -0.33 [95% CI, -0.60 to -0.07]) and that people who used cannabis during pregnancy should not be punished (β = -0.40 [95% CI, -0.73 to -0.07]). Among people who did not use cannabis before or during pregnancy, living in a warning signs state was associated with beliefs that use was not safe (β = 0.34 [95% CI, 0.17 to 0.51]), that people should be punished for use (β = 0.35 [95% CI, 0.24 to 0.47]), and that use was stigmatized (β = 0.35 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.63]). Warning signs policies were not associated with use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.22 to 5.67]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of warning signs and cannabis-related use and beliefs, warning signs policies were not associated with reduced cannabis use during pregnancy or with people who used cannabis believing use during pregnancy was less safe but were associated with greater support for punishment and stigma among people who did not use cannabis.

Indexed as

CannabisHallucinogensAdultCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsCluster AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansPregnancyCannabinoid Receptor AgonistsHallucinogens

Identifiers

PMID37314807
PMCPMC10267765

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.