ArticlePeerJ2024
Density of cannabis outlets
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Change of substance-related hospitalisation in adolescents after cannabis legalisation in Thailand in 2022.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- Cannabis tourism in transition: operators' perspectives on regulatory change and governance in Bangkok, Thailand.Journal of cannabis research · 2026Article
- Interactive associations of cannabis and alcohol outlet densities with assault injuries in California: a spatiotemporal analysis.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Relationship between hospitalization from cannabis usage and pulmonary tuberculosis in Thailand from 2017 to 2022.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Thailand recently decriminalized ( Methods: We conducted a community-based cross-sectional study in 11 provinces and the Bangkok Metropolitan Area. Participants were residents of sampled communities aged 20 years or older. We requested literate participants to self-administer the questionnaire and interviewed participants who could not read. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics with sampling weight adjustments and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results: The prevalence of current cannabis use was 15 percent. At a 400-m radius, participants who reported three cannabis outlets had 4.2 times higher odds of being current users than participants who reported no outlet (Adjusted OR = 4.82; 95% CI [3.04-7.63]). We found no association between outlet density and hazardous cannabis use or cannabis use disorder, nor association with the amount of cannabis use among cannabis smokers. Discussion and Conclusion: The patterns of association between outlet density and cannabis use behaviors were inconsistent. Furthermore, limitations regarding outlet density measurement and lack of temporality should be considered as caveats in the interpretation of the study findings.
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.