Exploring survey methods for measuring consumption quantities of cannabis flower and concentrate products.

Background: Researchers need accurate measurements of cannabis consumption quantities to assess risks and benefits. Survey methods for measuring cannabis flower and concentrate quantities remain underdeveloped.Objective: We examined "grams" and "hits" units for measuring flower and concentrate quantities, and calculating milligrams of THC (mgTHC).Methods: Online survey participants (n = 2,381) reported preferred unit (hits or grams), past-week hits and grams for each product, and product %THC. Quantile regression compared mgTHC between unit-preference subgroups. Hits-based mgTHC calculations assumed a universal grams-per-hit ratio (GPHR). To examine individualized GPHRs, we tested a "two-item approach," which divided total grams by total hits, and "one-item approach," which divided 0.5 grams by responses to the question: "How many total hits would it take you to finish 1/2 g of your [product] by [administration method]?"Results: Participants were primarily daily consumers (77%), 50% female sex, mean age 39.0 (SD 16.4), 85% White, 49% employed full-time. Compared to those who preferred the hits unit, those who preferred the grams unit reported consuming more hits and grams, higher %THC products, and consequently, larger median mgTHC (flower-hits mgTHC: 32 vs. 91 (95%CI: 52-67); flower-grams mgTHC: 27 vs. 113 (95%CI: 73-95); concentrate-hits mgTHC: 29 vs. 59 (95%CI: 15-43); concentrate-grams mgTHC: 61 vs. 129 (95%CI: 43-94)). "Two-item" and "one-item" approach GPHRs were similar and frequently 50% larger or smaller than the universal GPHR.Conclusion: Allowing respondents to choose "hits" or "grams" when reporting cannabis quantities does not compromise mgTHC estimates. A low-burden, one-item approach yields individualized "hit sizes" that may improve mgTHC estimates.

Exploring how tobacco advertisements are associated with tobacco use susceptibility in tobacco naive adolescents from the PATH study.

Adolescents' susceptibility to pro-tobacco marketing advertisements puts them at risk for initiating and continued use of tobacco. The objective of this study was to quantify the cross-sectional association between tobacco ad exposure and tobacco use susceptibility (e.g., curiosity about tobacco products, willingness, and future intention to try tobacco products) among tobacco-naive adolescents. Data came from Wave 4 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, a nationally-representative sample of US adolescents ages 12-17. We used logistic regression to examine (1) characteristics associated with tobacco ad exposure; (2) associations between tobacco ad exposures (by product type/venue) and tobacco use susceptibility (among tobacco-naive adolescents only). The results suggested that higher household income, living with tobacco user(s), substance use history, and mental health problem(s) were associated with increased odds of tobacco marketing exposure. Among tobacco naïve adolescents (N = 9455), tobacco ads exposure was positively associated with tobacco use susceptibility, compared with the non-exposure group. Seeing cigarettes/other non-ENDS tobacco products only was associated with a 1.64 increase in odds being susceptible to tobacco use; tobacco ads exposure via website and/or social media sites only (cigarette/other non-ENDS tobacco, AOR: 1.87, 95%CI: 1.25-2.81; ENDS, AOR: 2.25, 95%CI: 1.43-3.55) was associated with higher odds of tobacco use susceptibility, compared to the non-exposure group. With rapidly increasing rates of ENDS use in adolescents, it is crucial that advertisements promoting the initiation and continued use of ENDS are strictly regulated, especially among advertisements that are online and on social media sites.

Exploring How Social Media Exposure and Interactions Are Associated With ENDS and Tobacco Use in Adolescents From the PATH Study.

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco use is a current public health epidemic that puts individuals at risk for many health conditions and diseases, and adolescents are at high risk for the initiation and persistence of tobacco use behaviors partly due to engagement with social media content. The objective of this study is to examine the association between engaging in social media behaviors and patterns of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and tobacco use at a 1-year follow-up among 11 279 adolescents from the PATH study. METHODS: Five social media variables were questioned at Wave 2 and then compared to ENDS and tobacco status transitions (i.e., initiation, persistence, and escalation) at a 1-year follow-up, respectively. Survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Passive behaviors on social media were related to higher likelihoods of starting to use ENDS and other tobacco products. Additionally, active behaviors on social media were related to higher likelihoods for the initiation and persistence of tobacco use. In particular, sending tobacco content to other users was further associated with a higher likelihood of escalation of tobacco product use. DISCUSSION: Both exposure to and interactions with social media tobacco content had a significant impact on the patterns of ENDS and tobacco use in adolescents. Due to the amount of time adolescents spend engaging with online content, social media may be a critical place in which to intervene, possibly with the use of antitobacco or tobacco prevention messages. IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study have implications for public health and the policies surrounding adolescents and their exposure to social media. Reducing the ENDS and tobacco content to which adolescents are exposed has the potential to decrease the instances of initiation and persistence of ENDS and tobacco use. Intervening on social media may prevent or slow the progression of ENDS and tobacco use, and increase motivation and actions toward the cessation of tobacco use in adolescents.

Perceived safety of cannabis intoxication predicts frequency of driving while intoxicated.

Driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) is a public health concern, and data are needed to develop screening and prevention tools. Measuring the level of intoxication that cannabis users perceive as safe for driving could help stratify DUIC risk. This study tested whether intoxication levels perceived as safe for driving predicted past-month DUIC frequency. Online survey data were collected in 2017 from a national sample of n = 3010 past-month cannabis users with lifetime DUIC (age 18+). Respondents indicated past-month DUIC frequency, typical cannabis intoxication level (1-10 scale), and cannabis intoxication level perceived as safe for driving (0-10 scale). Approximately 24%, 38%, 13%, and 24% of respondents engaged in DUIC on 0, 1-9, 10-19, and 20-30 days respectively in the past month. Among these four DUIC frequency groups, median typical intoxication varied little (5-6), but median intoxication perceived as safe for driving varied widely (3-8). Higher intoxication levels perceived as safe for driving corresponded to frequent DUIC (Spearman's rho: 0.46). For each unit increase in intoxication level perceived as safe for driving, the odds of past-month DUIC increased 18% to 68% (multinomial logistic regression odds ratio - MOR1-9 days: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.13-1.23; MOR10-19 days: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.30-1.50; MOR20-30 days: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.57-1.80). In this targeted sample of past-month cannabis users, DUIC frequency varied widely, but daily/near-daily DUIC was common (24%). Measuring intoxication levels perceived as safe for driving permits delineation of past-month DUIC frequency. This metric has potential as a component of public health prevention tools.

Trends in Prescribed Central Nervous System Depressant Medications Among Adults Who Regularly Consume Alcohol: United States 1999 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: Although the risks of using central nervous system depressant (CNS-D) medications with alcohol are well documented, little is known about trends in prescribed use of these medications among individuals who regularly consume alcohol (i.e., trends in "concurrent use"). We examined changes in the prevalence of prescribed CNS-D medications among individuals who drank alcohol on 52 or more occasions in the past year ("regular drinking"). CNS-D medications included sedative-hypnotics (subclassified as anxiolytics or sleep medications) and opioids. METHODS: We used 8 cross-sectional cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999-2000 to 2013-2014) from participants aged 20 and older (n = 37,709). We used log-binomial regression to examine (i) prevalence trends of prescribed CNS-D medication use, (ii) trend differences by drinking status, and (iii) correlates of CNS-D medication use. RESULTS: Among those who drink regularly, the relative annual increase in prevalence of sedative-hypnotic use was 5.3% (95% CI: 2.7 to 7.9): Anxiolytic and sleep medication use increased annually by 3.7% (95% CI: 0.8 to 6.7) and 11.2% (95% CI: 6.5 to 16.0), respectively. Opioid use trends among those who drink regularly were not statistically significant but were nonlinear. Differences in CNS-D medication trends between those who drink regularly and those who drink infrequently/abstain were not statistically significant. Those who drink regularly were less likely than those who drink infrequently/abstain to use opioids (adjusted relative risk [ARR]: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.78) and anxiolytics (ARR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.81), but not sleep medications (ARR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.35). Those aged 40 and older were 2 to 5 times as likely as those aged 20 to 29 to use sedative-hypnotics. CONCLUSIONS: Among those who drink regularly, the prevalence of prescribed sedative-hypnotic use increased and prescribed opioid use remained common. These trends indicate that a substantial portion of the population is at risk of alcohol-related adverse drug reactions-particularly those aged 40 and older.

An update on cannabis use disorder with comment on the impact of policy related to therapeutic and recreational cannabis use.

Confusion and controversy related to the potential for cannabis use to cause harm, or alternatively to provide benefit, continues globally. This issue has grown in intensity and importance with the increased recognition of the public health implications related to the escalation of the legalization of cannabis and cannabinoid products. This selective overview and commentary attempt to succinctly convey what is known about one potential consequence of cannabis use, the development of cannabis use disorder (CUD). Such knowledge may help guide a reasonable and objective public health perspective on the potential impact of cannabis use and CUD. Current scientific data and clinical observation strongly support the contention that cannabis use, like the use of other substances such as alcohol, opioids, stimulants, and tobacco, can develop into a use disorder (addiction) with important clinical consequences. Epidemiological data indicate that the majority of those who use cannabis do not have problems related to their use, but a substantial subset (10-30%) do report experiencing symptoms and consequences consistent with a CUD. Treatment seeking for CUD comprises a substantial proportion of all substance use treatment admissions, yet treatment response rates show much room for improvement. Changing cannabis policies related to its therapeutic and recreational use are likely to impact the development of CUD and its course; however, definitive data on such effects are not yet available. Clearly, the development of more effective prevention and treatment strategies is needed for those vulnerable to developing a CUD and for those with a CUD.

Cannabis regulatory science: risk-benefit considerations for mental disorders.

The evolving legal cannabis landscape in the US continues to present novel regulatory challenges that necessitate the development of a Cannabis Regulatory Science. Two specific issues of concern within Cannabis Regulatory Science are (1) the impact that cannabis use has on the incidence, prevalence, and severity of mental disorders, and (2) how cannabis laws and regulations modify this impact. This paper first provides several conceptual points that are useful for evaluating the relationship between cannabis use and mental disorders. Second, it selectively reviews and comments on data relevant to the relationship between cannabis use and depression, several forms of anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. Next, regulatory and public health parallels between the nascent cannabis industry and the pharmaceutical, tobacco, and alcohol industries are discussed. The focus is on specific types of industry practices that may harm those with or at risk for mental disorders. Recommendations are then offered for legal cannabis regulations that could mitigate this harm. Last, future research goals are discussed for building the field of Cannabis Regulatory Science and addressing the potential negative impact of cannabis on those with mental disorders.

The potential impact of cannabis legalization on the development of cannabis use disorders.

Specific provisions of legal cannabis legislation and regulation could influence cannabis initiation, frequency and quantity of use, and progression to cannabis use disorder. This brief essay highlights scientifically based principles and risk factors that underlie substance use and addiction that can be leveraged to inform policies that might mitigate the development and consequences of cannabis use disorder. Specifically, pharmacologic, access/availability, and environmental factors are discussed in relation to their influence on substance use disorders to illustrate how regulatory provisions can differentially affect these factors and risk for addiction. Relevant knowledge from research and experience with alcohol and tobacco regulation are also considered. Research designed to inform regulatory policy and to evaluate the impact of cannabis legislation on cannabis use and problems is progressing. However, definitive findings will come slowly, and more concerted efforts and resources are needed to expedite this process. In the meantime, policymakers should take advantage of the large body of scientific literature on substance use to foster empirically-guided, common sense approaches to cannabis policy that focus on prevention of addiction.

Evaluating age-related disparities in cannabis-related problems among LGBT+ versus non-LGBT+ adults.

LGBT+ adults demonstrate greater cannabis-related problems (e.g., Cannabis Use Disorder [CUD]) compared to non-LGBT+ counterparts. No study has explored age-related disparities in cannabis problems across the adult lifespan, nor have studies identified specific CUD criteria that contribute to elevated CUD among LGBT+ adults. The purpose of this study was to examine associations between LGBT+ identity and age with endorsement of CUD criteria in a sample of regular cannabis consumers. An online sample of N = 4334 (25.1% LGBT+) adults aged 18-64 residing in the U.S. completed an online survey about cannabis use behaviors and CUD diagnostic criteria. Bivariate contrasts revealed significantly greater CUD criteria endorsement among LGBT+ respondents, largely driven by differences at younger ages. However, this effect disappeared in the majority of adjusted logistic regression models. LGBT+ identity was associated with greater probability of use in larger amounts (adjOR = 2.10, 95% CI: 1.22-3.60) and use despite physical/mental health problems (adjOR = 2.51, 95% CI:1.23-5.03). No age*LGBT+ identity interactions were detected. Plotted trends depict more pronounced disparities in outcomes among LGBT+ adults under 35 years. Several potential risk and protective factors including employment, education, and reasons for use were identified. There were age-related differences in these characteristics among LGBT+ and non-LGBT+ respondents. Initial findings highlight the need for LGBT+ research examining trends in health outcomes and sociodemographic and cannabis characteristics across the lifespan. The study also provides a substantive contribution regarding specific cannabis-related problems that young LGBT+ cannabis consumers may be more likely to endorse than their non-LGBT+ counterparts.

Extending Gender- and Sex-Based Analyses in Cannabis Research: Findings from an Online Sample of Gender Diverse Young Adult Consumers.

Background: Gender and sex can influence cannabis behaviors and consequences (Cannabis Use Disorder [CUD]). Research typically examines sex and gender independently. Gender analyses often exclude transgender and gender diverse (TGD) populations. The objectives of this study were to (a) replicate less frequent cannabis use among TGD young adults compared to cisgender counterparts (b) compare severity of CUD, and (c) examine the role of sex on cannabis outcomes. Method: Online survey participants between 18 and 34 (N=1213) from the United States who reported past-week cannabis consumption provided information on cannabis practices and CUD from February to April 2022. Bivariate analyses explored gender differences across frequency (daily frequency across routes of administration [ROAs]; daily use of 2+ ROAs, use throughout the day) and CUD. Adjusted regression models provided model-estimated marginal probabilities and means to examine differences across four gender-by-sex categories (cisgender men: n=385; cisgender women: n=681; male-at-birth TGD: n=26; female-at-birth TGD: n=121). Benjamini-Hochberg adjustments (10% false discovery rate) were applied. Results: Among past-week consumers, female-at-birth TGD participants demonstrated lower probability of daily flower smoking compared to cisgender men (0.54 vs. 0.67). Cisgender men reported greater probability of daily concentrate vaping (0.55) compared to cisgender women (0.45) and female-at-birth TGD participants (0.27); they were also more likely to report daily use of 2+ ROAs (cisgender men: 0.51 vs. cisgender women: 0.39 and female at-birth TGD: 0.27). TGD participants reported greater CUD severity compared to cisgender counterparts, t(1096)=-3.69, p=0.002. Model-estimated means found lower severity among cisgender women compared to cisgender men and female-at-birth TGD participants. Stratified regression models support positive associations between daily cannabis use and CUD in both TGD in cisgender groups. Among cisgender participants, greater severity was predicted by male sex, younger age, and younger age of onset. Conclusions: The present study replicates and extends a prior finding that among past-week cannabis consumers, TGD young adults report less frequent use than cisgender counterparts. Despite this, TGD participants demonstrated greater severity of CUD. While analyses were limited by the small sample of male-at-birth TGD participants, the article highlights the importance of expanding sex- and gender-focused analyses. Future work is expanding efforts to target hard-to-reach consumers.

A cross-sectional survey on cannabis: Characterizing motives, opinions, and subjective experiences associated with the use of various oral cannabis products.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis-infused products available for oral consumption include food and drink items (i.e., edibles) (e.g., baked goods, gummy-, chocolate-, and hard-candies, beverages/drinks) as well as non-food formulations (e.g., oils/tinctures, pills/capsules). This study characterized the motives, opinions, and subjective experiences associated with the use of these seven subtypes of oral cannabis products. METHODS: This web-based survey collected cross-sectional, self-report data from a convenience sample of 370 adults regarding various use-motives, self-reported cannabinoid content, subjective experiences, and opinions related to ingesting oral cannabis products with alcohol and/or food. Advice participants had received about modifying oral cannabis product effects, in general, was also collected. RESULTS: Participants reported consuming cannabis baked goods and gummy candies most frequently over the past year (68% and 63%, respectively). Participants were less likely to use oils/tinctures for enjoyment/desire relative to other product types and more likely to use oils/tinctures for therapeutic purposes (e.g., medication-replacement). Self-reported cannabinoid content was highly variable across participants and within product subtype. Participants reported feeling stronger and longer-lasting effects when consuming oral cannabis products on an empty stomach and 43% received advice to "eat a snack or meal" to mitigate effects that are too strong, which contrasts with controlled studies. Finally, 43% of participants reported modifying their experiences with alcohol at least some of time. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the need to further evaluate use-motives as well as the interaction between dietary factors, cannabinoid pharmacokinetics, and subjective drug effects and the interactive effects of oral cannabis products and alcohol in a controlled laboratory setting.

Dimensionality and differential functioning of DSM-5 cannabis use disorder criteria in an online sample of adults with frequent cannabis use.

The DSM-5 criteria for cannabis use disorder (CUD) combine DSM-IV dependence and abuse criteria (without legal problems) and new withdrawal and craving criteria. Information on dimensionality, internal reliability, and differential functioning of the DSM-5 CUD criteria is lacking. Additionally, dimensionality of the DSM-5 withdrawal items is unknown. This study examined the psychometric properties of the DSM-5 CUD criteria among adults who used cannabis in the past 7 days (N = 5,119). Adults with frequent cannabis use were recruited from the US general population through social media and filled in a web-based survey about demographics and cannabis use behaviors. Factor analysis was used to assess dimensionality, and item response theory analysis models were used to explore relationships between the criteria and the underlying latent trait (CUD), and whether each criterion and the criteria set functioned differently by demographic and clinical characteristics: sex, age, state-level cannabis laws, reasons for cannabis use, and frequency of use. The DSM-5 CUD criteria showed unidimensionality and provided information about the CUD latent trait across the severity spectrum. The cannabis withdrawal items indicated one underlying latent factor. While some CUD criteria functioned differently in specific subgroups, the criteria set as a whole functioned similarly across subgroups. In this online sample of adults with frequent cannabis use, evidence supports the reliability, validity, and utility of the DSM-5 CUD diagnostic criteria set, which can be used for determining a major risk of cannabis use, i.e., CUD, to inform cannabis policies and public health messaging, and for developing intervention strategies.

Generalizability and representativeness: Considerations for internet-based research on substance use behaviors.

Substance use is frequently studied using nonprobability internet-based samples. It is difficult to evaluate the utility of these samples without a clear understanding of two key concepts: generalizability and representativeness. Part 1 of this article (a) offers a particular viewpoint on the distinctions and relations between these two concepts, (b) suggests that purposive (i.e., nonprobability) samples, when used carefully, can be used to construct valid scientific generalizations, and (c) explores some analytical consequences of sampling decisions that change sample heterogeneity. Part 2 of this article explores the overlap between internet-based sampling of substance use behaviors and the concepts discussed in Part 1. Specifically, Part 2 reviews relevant literature and presents example analyses of an internet-based cannabis use data set to highlight (a) strengths and weaknesses of internet-based sampling and (b) how unique elements of a given online platform (e.g., primary motive for visiting the platform) and the substance being studied (e.g., degree of societal stigma) might inform the types of boundaries, caveats, qualifiers, and limitations that are incorporated into a generalization crafted based on the data. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Characterizing cannabis use reduction and change in functioning during treatment: Initial steps on the path to new clinical endpoints.

Reduction-based cannabis use endpoints are needed to better evaluate treatments for cannabis use disorder (CUD). This exploratory, secondary analysis aimed to characterize cannabis frequency and quantity reduction patterns and corresponding changes in psychosocial functioning during treatment. We analyzed 16 weeks (4 prerandomization, 12 postrandomization) of data (n = 302) from both arms of a randomized clinical trial assessing pharmacotherapy for CUD. Cannabis consumption pattern classes were extracted with latent profile modeling using self-reported (a) past-week days used (i.e., frequency) and (b) past-week average grams used per using day (i.e., quantity). Changes in mean Marijuana Problem Scale (MPS) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores were examined among classes. Urine cannabinoid levels were examined in relation to self-reported consumption as a validity check. Two-, three-, four-, and five-class solutions each provided potentially useful conceptualizations of associations between frequency and quantity. Regardless of solution, reductions in MPS scores varied in magnitude across classes and closely tracked class-specific reductions in consumption (e.g., larger MPS reduction corresponded to larger frequency/quantity reductions). Changes in HADS scores were less pronounced and less consistent with consumption patterns. Urine cannabinoid levels closely matched class-specific self-reported consumption frequency. Findings illustrate that frequency and quantity can be used in tandem within mixture model frameworks to summarize heterogeneous cannabis use reduction patterns that may correspond to improved psychosocial functioning. Going forward, similar analytic strategies applied to alternative metrics of cannabis consumption may facilitate construction of useful reduction-based clinical endpoints. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Use patterns, beliefs, experiences, and behavioral economic demand of indica and sativa cannabis: A cross-sectional survey of cannabis users.

Cannabis products available for retail purchase are often marketed based on purported plant species (e.g., "indica" or "sativa"). The cannabis industry frequently claims that indica versus sativa cannabis elicits unique effects and/or is useful for different therapeutic indications. Few studies have evaluated use patterns, beliefs, subjective experiences, and situations in which individuals use indica versus sativa. A convenience sample of cannabis users (n = 179) was surveyed via Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk). Participants were asked about their prior use of, subjective experiences with, and opinions on indica versus sativa cannabis and completed hypothetical purchasing tasks for both cannabis subtypes. Participants reported a greater preference to use indica in the evening and sativa in the morning and afternoon. Participants were more likely to perceive feeling "sleepy/tired" or "relaxed" after using indica and "alert," "energized," and "motivated" after using sativa. Respondents were more likely to endorse wanting to use indica if they were going to sleep soon but more likely to use sativa at a party. Hypothetical purchasing patterns (i.e., grams of cannabis purchased as a function of escalating price) did not differ between indica and sativa, suggesting that demand was similar. Taken together, cannabis users retrospectively report feeling different effects from indica and sativa; however, demand generally did not differ between cannabis subtypes, suggesting situational factors could influence whether someone uses indica or sativa. Placebo-controlled, blinded studies are needed to characterize the pharmacodynamics and chemical composition of indica and sativa cannabis and to determine whether user expectancies contribute to differences in perceived indica/sativa effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Evaluating cannabis use risk reduction as an alternative clinical outcome for cannabis use disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Abstinence is rarely achieved in clinical trials for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Cannabis reduction is associated with functional improvement, but reduction endpoints have not been established, indicating a need to identify and validate clinically meaningful reduction endpoints for assessing treatment efficacy. METHOD: Data from a 12-week double-blind randomized placebo-controlled medication trial for cannabis cessation (NCT01675661) were analyzed. Participants (N = 225) were treatment-seeking adults, M = 30.6 (8.9) years old, 70.2% male, and 42.2% Non-White, with CUD who completed 12 weeks of treatment. Frequency (days of use per week) and quantity (grams per using day) were used to define high-, medium-, and low-risk levels. Anxiety and depression were assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and cannabis-related problems were assessed using the Marijuana Problems Scale. General linear models for repeated measures tested associations between the magnitude of risk reduction and functional outcomes from baseline (BL) to end-of-treatment (EOT). RESULTS: Cannabis risk levels were sensitive to reductions in use from BL to EOT for frequency- (χ² = 19.35, p = .004) and quantity-based (χ² = 52.06, p < .001) metrics. Magnitude reduction in frequency-based risk level was associated with magnitude decrease in depression (F = 2.76, p = .043, ηp² = .04), anxiety (F = 3.70, p = .013, ηp² = .05), and cannabis-related problems (F = 8.95, p < .001, ηp² = .12). Magnitude reduction in quantity-based risk level was associated with magnitude decrease in anxiety (F = 3.02, p = .031, ηp² = .04) and cannabis-related problems (F = 3.24, p = .023, ηp² = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis use risk levels, as operationalized in this study, captured reductions in use during a clinical trial. Risk level reduction was associated with functional improvement suggesting that identifying risk levels and measuring the change in levels over time may be a viable and clinically meaningful endpoint for determining treatment efficacy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Cannabis Practices Among a Gender-Diverse Sample of Young Adults.

Background: Gender is an important factor in understanding cannabis patterns, yet few studies have explored cannabis patterns among gender minority (GM) individuals - particularly among high-risk age groups including young adults. The evolving cannabis market is reshaping typical patterns of cannabis use in the U.S. The combination of these factors warrants increased efforts to examine cannabis practices in gender-diverse samples. Methods: Online survey participants between 18-34 years (N=2377) from the U.S. provided information on cannabis practices from May - July 2021. Gender differences across several cannabis outcomes (onset, methods of consumption, product potency, frequency, and quantity) were assessed. Bivariate tests and multiple regression models examined associations between gender (cisgender men: n=1020; cisgender women: n=1178; and GM: n=179) and cannabis outcomes adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. Results: In regression models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, GM identity was associated with later age of onset and lower likelihood of daily use compared to cisgender men and women. Identifying as GM or cisgender woman was associated with fewer lifetime methods of consumption and lower plant and concentrate potency usage. Conclusions: Findings provide initial insights into potential gender differences in cannabis practices from a sample of heavy cannabis users. GM young adults report use patterns indicative of lower risk compared to cisgender men and women in our sample. Future investigations of gender differences in cannabis use that explore specific gender minority categories and that include alternative sampling strategies are needed to better understand differential risks associated with gender.

Typical Hits, Grams, or Joints: Evaluating Cannabis Survey Measurement Strategies for Quantifying Consumption.

Aim: Standardized survey measures that capture diverse cannabis consumption patterns are needed to inform public health and policy. Our team is developing a flexible, personalized, low-burden survey item inventory to measure cannabis use patterns and estimate milligrams of THC (mgTHC) consumption in large samples. This study aimed to identify measurement gaps and analysis implications associated with an initial pool of candidate items that assessed use of cannabis flower and concentrate products (smoked and/or vaporized). Methods: Adult cannabis consumers (n=4247) completed an online survey assessing cannabis use frequency, quantity, product types, product potencies (%THC), and methods of administration. Participants chose to report their consumption quantities using one of three units: "hits per day," "grams per week," or "joints per week." Respondents also indicated whether their past 7-day consumption pattern represented their typical pattern. Results: Eighty-one percent had used cannabis daily in the past week. Thirty-two percent, 53%, and 15% chose to report flower and concentrate consumption quantity in hits, grams, and joints, respectively. Approximately 80-90% of responses for the number of hits, grams, and joints consumed were less than the maximum response option-suggesting that response options captured the full range of potential cannabis consumption behaviors. Those who chose grams or joints units were generally more likely to endorse higher risk cannabis use (e.g., morning use, high %THC products) in the past week than those who chose the hits unit (adjusted Odds Ratio range: 1.2-3.9). Among those who reported that the past week represented their typical behavior (83%), past 30-day and past 7-day frequencies were highly correlated (Spearman's Rho=0.77)-supporting the feasibility of using lower burden "typical week" items to extrapolate patterns beyond a 1-week time frame. Conclusion: Results from this online convenience sample of frequent cannabis consumers suggest that the current items yield coherent and expected response patterns. Although additional testing is required, a standardized, flexible survey instrument for large-scale assessment of cannabis patterns and calculation of mgTHC seems within reach.

Estimating THC Consumption from Smoked and Vaped Cannabis Products in an Online Survey of Adults Who Use Cannabis.

Introduction: Quantification of consumption patterns of the primary psychoactive compounds in cannabis, which cause euphoria or intoxication, is sorely needed to identify potential risks and benefits of use and to provide meaningful safety information to the public. The diversity of products available, multiple methods of administration, and lack of labeling of products have made such quantification challenging. Our group is developing a survey instrument for estimating the quantity of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) consumed in population samples, which is flexible and incorporates individualized reports of patterns of consumption. This study provides an illustration of a procedure for translating self-reported consumption into milligrams of THC (mgTHC), which may serve as a working model for future quantification efforts. Methods: Social media advertising was leveraged to enroll 5627 adults who use cannabis into an online, anonymous survey study. Only those who used cannabis in the past 7 days, used flower or concentrate products, and who chose to report their quantity of use in hits per day or grams per week (n=3211) were included in this report. Formulas were used to estimate mgTHC used per day, in hits per day or grams per week; potency (%THC); constants for estimating the amount of material consumed for each hit; and a method of administration efficiency constant to account for THC loss due to the administration method. Results: The estimate for mgTHC used per day was M=92.8 mg/day (SD=97.2 mg; 1st-3rd quartile range=25-132 mg). The estimated quantity of use was much lower for those reporting in hits (M=43.7 mg, SD=43.8) than for those reporting in grams (M=115.1 mg, SD=107.0). The estimated rate of binge use in the past week, arbitrarily defined as more than 50 mgTHC within any one daily time quadrant, was 6.8%, which increased to 29.3% if 25 mgTHC was used. Conclusions: The approach illustrated in this study goes beyond existing cannabis measures by asking participants to provide highly detailed estimates of their past 7-day use patterns and then applying a logical formula to translate this information into mgTHC. This initial procedure has limitations and lacks generalization; however, we hope this demonstration stimulates testing of similar approaches and relevant laboratory experiments that will enhance the validity of cannabis consumption estimation procedures.