ArticleSubstance use & misuse2026
Validity of Self-Reported Cannabis Use Based on Urine Toxicology Measures in a Population-Based Pregnancy Cohort in Michigan.
Article in Substance use & misuse, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrenatal cannabis use may be underreported due to social stigma and fear of legal repercussions. The study assesses the validity of self-reported prenatal cannabis use versus urine toxicology measures and determines correlates of non-disclosure.
methodsData are from a statewide population-based pregnancy cohort (MARCH- Michigan Archive for Research on Child Health). Participants were recruited at first prenatal visit from 22 clinics in 2017-2023. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV) of self-reported cannabis use using urine toxicology as the criterion standard.
results606 participants who self-reported cannabis use data within 30 days of urine collection were considered for analysis. Self-reports identified a prevalence of 14.2% for prenatal cannabis use, whereas urinalysis prevalence was 19.1%. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of self-report were 57.8%, 96.1%, 77.9% and 90.6%, respectively. No significant differences were observed between participants who disclosed and those who did not, except for race and ethnicity. The sensitivity of self-reports among Non-Hispanic Blacks was 45.5% compared to 73.0% for their non-Hispanic White counterparts.
conclusionsSelf-reports can underestimate prenatal cannabis use especially among disadvantaged populations. The use of biospecimens to assess cannabis exposure is warranted for reducing misclassification and improving validity in research studies.
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.