ArticleBMJ open2024
National cross-sectional survey of US adults to assess the reliability of current and lifetime cannabis smoking.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective is to examine the test-retest reliability and internal reliability of six self-report questions assessing both current (past 30 days) and lifetime cannabis smoking in an internet survey in the adult US population.
designCross-sectional national survey.
participantsOut of 957 US adults who completed a national 2020 survey administered through Ipsos KnowledgePanel, 557 completed a second survey ('reliability survey') aimed at assessing the test-retest and internal reliability of questions asking about current and lifetime cannabis smoking. The sample size used in the analysis for the six self-report questions varied and was dependent on respondents answering the questions in both the 2020 survey and the reliability survey. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Test-retest and internal reliability of six self-report questions asking about current and lifetime cannabis smoking.
resultsAmong respondents who had smoked cannabis in the past 30 days, 33.8% were aged 18-34, 29.7% were 35-49, 27.7% were 50-64 and 8.8% were 65 or older. Current cannabis smokers were primarily men (59.5%) and white (63.0%). Almost half of current cannabis smokers had a high school diploma or less followed by some college and a bachelor's degree or higher (45.7%, 30.6%, 23.8%, respectively). The question assessing number of days participants smoked cannabis in the past 30 days demonstrated good test-retest (r=0.87) and excellent internal reliability (α=0.94). The questions assessing the number of years, the most common form of use and the number of times participants smoked cannabis over their lifetime also demonstrated test-retest (r=0.77 (acceptable), r=0.75 (acceptable) and κ=0.65 (substantial), respectively) and excellent-to-good internal reliability (α=0.91, α=0.87 and α=0.88, respectively).
conclusionsWe found simple questions assessing current and lifetime cannabis use to demonstrate both test-retest reliability and internal reliability. These questions can serve as a simple framework for clinicians to evaluate the frequency of cannabis smoking in their patients. Future work should examine if these simple frequency measures of smoking cannabis are associated with adverse health outcomes.
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.