Age differences in patterns of cannabis use among an online US sample of adults who consume cannabis frequently.

Background: Cannabis use is increasing among middle-aged and older US adults, populations that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of cannabis. Risks for adverse effects differ by cannabis use patterns, which have become increasingly heterogeneous. Nevertheless, little is known about age differences in such patterns.Objective: To investigate age differences in cannabis use patterns, comparing younger (age 18-49), middle-aged (age 50-64), and older adults (age ≥65).Methods: A total of 4,151 US adults with past 7-day cannabis consumption completed an online survey (35.1% male; 60.1% female; 4.8% identified as "other"). Regression models examined age differences in cannabis use patterns.Results: Compared to younger adults, middle-aged and older adults were more likely to consume cannabis during evening hours (50-64: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.98, 95% CI 2.24-3.96; ≥65: aOR = 4.23, 95 CI 2.82-6.35); by only one method (50-64: aOR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.34-2.09; ≥65: aOR = 3.38, 95 CI 2.24-5.09); primarily by smoking as the only method (50-64: aOR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.29-1.78; ≥65: aOR = 2.12, 95 CI 1.64-2.74); but less likely to consume concentrated cannabis products (concentrates) with extremely high %THC (50-64: aOR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.54-0.93; ≥65: aOR = 0.30, 95 CI 0.16-0.55). Age differences in cannabis use patterns were also observed between middle-aged and older adults.Conclusion: Findings suggest that middle-aged and older adults may engage in less risky cannabis use patterns compared to younger groups (e.g. lower likelihood of consuming highly potent concentrates). However, findings also underscore the importance of recognizing risks unique to these older demographics, such as smoking-related health events. Consequently, prevention strategies targeting such use patterns are needed.

Self-Reported Substance Use With Clinician Interviewers Versus Self-Administered Surveys.

OBJECTIVE: Underreporting of substance use is a frequent concern about studies based on self-report, but few robust studies have examined the agreement between different methods for capturing self-reported substance use. The current study therefore used repeated measures to compare self-reported substance use using (a) clinician interviewers and (b) self-administered computerized surveys in a sample that included both inpatients and community residents. METHOD: Adults age 18 years and older with problematic substance use were recruited from the community or an inpatient addiction treatment facility. At baseline (N = 588), 3-month (n = 469), and 6-month (n = 476) interviews, participants were asked whether they used alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, and prescription painkillers by two methods: semi-structured, clinician-administered interview, and computerized self-administered questionnaire. Agreement between these two methods was investigated using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Multivariable logistic regression assessed differences in the odds of discordance between the two measures by recruitment source, gender, age, race/ethnicity, employment status, marital status, and level of education. RESULTS: There was moderate-to-strong agreement between clinician-administered and self-administered surveys for alcohol (kappa = .70-.88), cannabis (kappa = .87-.92), cocaine (kappa = .81-.89), and heroin (kappa = .90-.92). However, there was only weak-to-moderate agreement for nonmedical use of prescription painkillers (kappa = .55-.71), with the self-administered questionnaire capturing a higher prevalence of use (percent difference = 2.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinician interviewers and self-administered surveys were shown to capture similar rates of self-reported use of alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, and heroin. Surveys assessing nonmedical prescription opioid use may benefit from using self-administered questionnaires.

Use of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide by Major Depression Status.

Importance: Renewed interest in the clinical potential of hallucinogens may lead people with depression to a generally more positive view of the use of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). Therefore, past-year LSD use among people with depression may be increasing in prevalence. Objective: To assess time trends in the prevalence of past-year nonmedical LSD use by past-year major depression status and the variation in this association by sociodemographic characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used pooled publicly available data from 478 492 adults aged 18 years or older who were administered the National Survey on Drug Use and Health from 2008 through 2019. Statistical analysis was conducted from December 2022 to June 2023. Main Outcome and Measures: Past-year major depression diagnoses per criteria from the DSM-IV were analyzed. Logistic regression models examined whether time trends in past-year nonmedical LSD use differed between adults with vs without past-year depression, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. Secondary analyses examined whether the trends in LSD use by depression status differed between sociodemographic subgroups. Results: The analytic sample included 478 492 adults, of whom 51.8% were female, 56.1% were younger than 50 years, 11.7% were Black, 15.1% were Hispanic, 65.8% were White, and 7.5% were another race. Weighted interview response rates ranged from 64.9% to 75.6% during the study time frame. From 2008 to 2019, past-year use of LSD increased significantly more among adults with major depression (2008 prevalence, 0.5%; 2019 prevalence, 1.8%; prevalence difference [PD], 1.3% [95% CI, 1.0%-1.6%]) compared with adults without major depression (2008 prevalence, 0.2%; 2019 prevalence, 0.8%; PD, 0.6% [95% CI, 0.5%-0.7%]) (difference in difference, 0.8% [95% CI, 0.5%-1.1%]). This difference was particularly pronounced among young adults aged 34 years or younger (PD among those aged 18-25 years with depression, 3.3% [95% CI, 2.5%-4.2%]; PD among those aged 26-34 years with depression, 2.7% [95% CI, 1.6%-3.8%]) and individuals with incomes less than $75 000 per year (PD among those with income <$20 000, 1.9% [95% CI, 1.3%-2.6%]; PD among those with income $20 000-$49 999, 1.5% [95% CI, 1.0%-2.1%]; PD among those with income $50 000-$74 999, 1.3% [95% CI, 0.7%-2.0%]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that, from 2008 to 2019, there was a disproportionate increase in the prevalence of past-year LSD use among US adults with past-year depression. Among those with depression, this increase was particularly strong among younger adults and those with lower household incomes. Among individuals with depression who also report LSD use, clinicians should discuss potential strategies for mitigating harm and maximizing benefits in medically unsupervised settings.

Mental and Physical Health Conditions Among U.S. Veterans with Cannabis Use and Cannabis Use Disorders.

Purpose of Review: Veterans are a large population that is disproportionately affected by various physical and mental health conditions. The primary aim of this review is to provide a concise overview of recent literature on the prevalence of cannabis use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) among US Veterans, and associations with mental and physical health conditions. We also addressed gaps in the literature by investigating associations between CUD and mental and physical health conditions in 2019 data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA; N=5,657,277). Recent Findings: In total, 25 studies were reviewed. In 2019, the prevalence of Veteran cannabis use ranged from 11.9%-18.7%. Cannabis use and CUD were associated with bipolar disorders, psychotic disorders, suicidality, pain conditions, and other substance use, but less consistently associated with depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder. Analyses of 2019 VHA data indicated that CUD was strongly associated with a broad array of physical and mental health conditions and mortality. Summary: Cannabis use and CUD are prevalent and highly comorbid with other conditions among US Veterans. Harm reduction methods tailored to these populations are needed.

Test characteristics of shorter versions of the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) for brief screening for problematic substance use in a population sample from Israel.

BACKGROUND: Substance use is a leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality worldwide. Population-wide screening for problematic substance use in primary health care may mitigate the serious health and socio-economic consequences of such use, but the standard Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST 3.1) may be too long for wide-scale screening. How well validated shorter versions (ASSIST-Lite, ASSIST-FC) perform in identifying those with ASSIST 3.1 problematic use in different settings is unclear. METHODS: General population Jewish adults in Israel (N = 2,474) responded to an online survey that included the ASSIST 3.1 and sociodemographics. Across substances (alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, sedatives, prescription stimulants, prescription painkillers), receiver operator characteristic curve analysis determined that ASSIST-FC scores performed better than ASSIST-Lite at identifying those with problematic use, and evaluated differential ASSIST-FC performance by gender or age. Test characteristics and agreement were evaluated for binary ASSIST-FC versions, with ASSIST 3.1 problematic use as the gold standard. RESULTS: ASSIST-FC scores showed high ability to identify ASSIST 3.1 problematic use, with minimal differences by gender or age. Binary ASSIST-FC (most substances: threshold 3+; alcohol: 5+) showed high specificity and positive predictive value, acceptable sensitivity, and good agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The ASSIST-FC, which assesses frequency of use and other's concerns about use, appears useful for very brief screening in primary care to identify patients who may benefit from intervention. Early identification of those at-risk may prevent more severe consequences and ultimately decrease the significant costs of problematic substance use on the individual and population level.

Does food use disorder exist? Item response theory analyses of a food use disorder adapted from the DSM-5 substance use disorder criteria in a treatment seeking clinical sample.

BACKGROUND: Increased consumption of food that are high in energy and sugar have been pointed as a major factor in the obesity epidemic. Impaired control of food intake and the concept of food addiction has been developed as a potential contributor. Our objective was to evaluate the dimensionality and psychometric validity of diagnostic criteria for food addiction adapted from the 11 DSM-5 substance use disorder (SUD) criteria (i.e.: Food Use Disorder (FUD) criteria), and to evaluate the influence of age, gender, and body mass index (BMI). METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study including 508 participants (56.1% male; mean age 42.2) from outpatient treatment clinics for obesity or addiction disorders at time of admission. FUD diagnostic criteria were analyzed using confirmatory factor and 2-parameter item response theory analyses. Differential Item and Test Functioning analyses were performed across age, gender, and BMI. RESULTS: We demonstrated the one-factor dimensionality of the criteria set. The criterion "craving" presented the strongest factor loading and discrimination parameter and the second-lowest difficulty. We found some significant uniform differential item functioning for body mass index. We found some differential test functioning for gender and BMI. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports, for the first time, the validity of a potential Food Use Disorder (derived from the 11 DSM-5 SUD criteria adapted to food) in a sample of treatment seeking adults. This has great implications both at the clinical level and in terms of public health policy in the context of the global obesity epidemic.

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.

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.

Cannabis use, cannabis use disorder and mental health disorders among pregnant and postpartum women in the US: A nationally representative study.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) are associated with mental health disorders, however the extent of this matter among pregnant and recently postpartum (e.g., new moms) women in the US is unknown. Associations between cannabis use, DSM-5 CUD and DSM-5 mental health disorders (mood, anxiety, personality and post-traumatic stress disorders) were examined among a nationally representative sample of pregnant and postpartum women. METHODS: The 2012-2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III was used to examine associations between past-year cannabis use, CUD and mental health disorders. Weighted logistic regression models were used to estimate unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (aORs). The sample (N=1316) included 414 pregnant and 902 postpartum women (pregnant in the past year), aged 18-44 years old. RESULTS: The prevalence of past-year cannabis use and CUD was 9.8% and 3.2%, respectively. The odds of cannabis use (aORs range 2.10-3.87, p-values<0.01) and CUD (aORs range 2.55-10.44, p-values< 0.01) were higher among women with versus without any past-year mood, anxiety or posttraumatic stress disorders or any lifetime personality disorder. aORs for the association of cannabis use with specific mood, anxiety or personality disorders ranged from 1.95 to 6.00 (p-values<0.05). aORs for the association of CUD with specific mood, anxiety or personality disorders ranged from 2.36 to 11.60 (p-values<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: From pregnancy up to one year postpartum is a critical period where women may be particularly vulnerable to mental health disorders, cannabis use and CUD. Treatment and prevention are essential.

Evaluating cannabis exposure in survey items: Insights, strategies, and remaining challenges identified from cognitive interviewing.

Background: The diversity in characteristics of cannabis products and behavior patterns make evaluation of cannabis exposure in population-based, self-report surveys challenging. Accurate identification of cannabis exposure and related outcomes necessitates a thorough understanding of participants' interpretations of survey questions assessing cannabis consumption behaviors. Objectives: The current study utilized cognitive interviewing to gain insight on participants' interpretation of items in a self-reported survey instrument used to estimate the quantity of THC consumed in population samples. Methods: Cognitive interviewing was used to evaluate survey items assessing cannabis use frequency, routes of administration, quantity, potency, and perceived "typical patterns" of use. Ten participants ≥18 years (n = 4 cisgender-men; n = 3 cisgender-women; n = 3 non-binary/transgender) who had used cannabis plant material or concentrates in the past week were recruited to take a self-administered questionnaire and subsequently answer a series of scripted probes regarding survey items. Results: While most items presented no issues with comprehension, participants identified several areas of ambiguity in question or response item wording or in visual cues included in the survey. Generally, participants with irregular use patterns (i.e., non-daily use) reported more difficulty recalling the time or quantity of cannabis use. Findings resulted in several changes to the updated survey, including updated reference images and new quantity/frequency of use items specific to the route of administration. Conclusion: Incorporating cognitive interviewing into cannabis measurement development among a sample of knowledgeable cannabis consumers led to improvements in assessing cannabis exposure in population surveys, which may otherwise have been missed.

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.

Adult use of highly-potent Δ9-THC cannabis concentrate products by U.S. state cannabis legalization status, 2021.

BACKGROUND: Compared to plant/flower cannabis products, cannabis concentrates have higher average potency of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), which may be associated with greater likelihood of cannabis-related harms. Information on factors associated with use of cannabis concentrates is needed. METHODS: Respondents were 4,328 adult past-7-day cannabis users from all 50 U.S. states and Washington DC (DC) who participated in an online 2021 survey. Using logistic regression to generate adjusted odds ratios (aOR), we investigated whether participants in states that enacted recreational cannabis laws (RCL, 12 states plus DC [treated as a state], n = 1,236) or medical cannabis laws (MCL-only, 23 states, n = 2,030) by December 31, 2020 were more likely than those in states without cannabis laws (no-CL, 15 states, n = 1,062) to use cannabis concentrate products in the prior 7 days. RESULTS: Most participants (92.4%) used plant material in the prior 7 days; 57.0% used cannabis concentrates. In RCL, MCL and no-CL states, concentrate use was reported by 61.5%, 56.6%, and 52.5%, respectively. Compared to participants in no-CL states, odds of using cannabis concentrate products were greater among those in RCL states (aOR = 1.47; CI = 1.17-1.84) and MCL-only states (aOR = 1.29; CI = 1.08-1.55). Whether states had legally-authorized dispensaries had little effect on results. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that individuals in MCL-only and RCL states are more likely to use cannabis concentrate products. Determining mechanisms underlying these results, e.g., commercialization, could provide important information for prevention. Clinicians should be alert to patient use of concentrates, especially in MCL-only and RCL states. Continued monitoring is warranted as additional states legalize cannabis use.

Sex differences in Cannabis use disorder and associated psychosocial problems among US adults, 2012-2013.

While men show greater prevalence of cannabis use disorder (CUD) than women, whether cannabis use frequency drives this difference is unknown, and little is known about sex differences in problems associated with CUD. We therefore assessed the association of CUD with sex, adjusted for frequency of use, and compared the association of psychosocial and health-related problems with CUD between men and women. We included US adults age ≥ 18 who reported past-year cannabis use in the 2012-2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (n = 3701). Cannabis use frequency, DSM-5 CUD and problems (interpersonal, financial, legal, health-related) were assessed. Associations between psychosocial problems, sex and DSM-5 CUD were assessed using prevalence differences (PD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from logistic regression models, controlling for demographics and cannabis use frequency, and effect modification by sex was assessed. We found that the prevalence of CUD among men versus women was not significantly greater after adjusting for use frequency. Women had significantly higher prevalence of interpersonal, financial and health-related problems than men, adjusting for frequency of use. Women showed significantly greater association of CUD with interpersonal problems with a boss or co-workers (p < 0.05) and a neighbor, relative or friend (p < 0.05) compared to men. Lack of sex differences in CUD after adjusting for frequency of use suggests use frequency may be an important target of CUD prevention efforts. CUD showed stronger associations for interpersonal problems among women than men, suggesting the need for particular emphasis on treating interpersonal problems related to cannabis use among women.

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.

Comparing mental and physical health of U.S. veterans by VA healthcare use: implications for generalizability of research in the VA electronic health records.

OBJECTIVE: The Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) electronic health records (EHR) offer a rich source of big data to study medical and health care questions, but patient eligibility and preferences may limit generalizability of findings. We therefore examined the representativeness of VA veterans by comparing veterans using VA healthcare services to those who do not. METHODS: We analyzed data on 3051 veteran participants age ≥ 18 years in the 2019 National Health Interview Survey. Weighted logistic regression was used to model participant characteristics, health conditions, pain, and self-reported health by past year VA healthcare use and generate predicted marginal prevalences, which were used to calculate Cohen's d of group differences in absolute risk by past-year VA healthcare use. RESULTS: Among veterans, 30.4% had past-year VA healthcare use. Veterans with lower income and members of racial/ethnic minority groups were more likely to report past-year VA healthcare use. Health conditions overrepresented in past-year VA healthcare users included chronic medical conditions (80.6% vs. 69.4%, d = 0.36), pain (78.9% vs. 65.9%; d = 0.35), mental distress (11.6% vs. 5.9%; d = 0.47), anxiety (10.8% vs. 4.1%; d = 0.67), and fair/poor self-reported health (27.9% vs. 18.0%; d = 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneity in veteran sociodemographic and health characteristics was observed by past-year VA healthcare use. Researchers working with VA EHR data should consider how the patient selection process may relate to the exposures and outcomes under study. Statistical reweighting may be needed to generalize risk estimates from the VA EHR data to the overall veteran population.

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.

Construct validity of DSM-5 cannabis use disorder diagnosis and severity levels in adults with problematic substance use.

The DSM-5 definition of cannabis use disorder (CUD) differs from DSM-IV by combining abuse and dependence criteria (without the legal criterion) and including withdrawal and craving criteria. Information on construct validity of the DSM-5 CUD diagnosis and severity levels is lacking. This study examines the associations between DSM-5 CUD and severity classification and a set of concurrent validators. Adults with problematic substance use were recruited from two settings: a research setting in an urban medical center and a suburban inpatient addiction treatment program. Participants who reported past-year cannabis use (n = 392) were included in this study and completed a semi-structured, clinician-administered diagnostic interview. Regression models estimated the associations between binary DSM-5 CUD and severity levels with a set of validators, including cannabis use variables, psychopathology, and functional impairment. DSM-5 CUD and all severity levels were associated with cannabis use validators, including number of days used, self-reporting that cannabis use was a major problem, and greater cannabis craving. DSM-5 CUD and severe CUD were associated with other psychiatric disorders and social impairment. Findings add information about the validity of DSM-5 CUD diagnosis and severity levels, with severe CUD receiving the strongest support from its association with validators across all domains, as distinct from the mild and moderate CUD measures that were associated with cannabis-specific validators alone. Severe CUD is likely to require more intensive treatment to bolster physical, psychiatric, and social functioning, whereas the mild and moderate severity thresholds provide useful information for identifying less severe disorders for prevention and brief intervention.

Use of plant-based hallucinogens and dissociative agents: U.S. Time Trends, 2002-2019.

Aims: Information on time trends in use of different plant-based hallucinogens is lacking. The current study used nationally representative U.S. data to assess overall and age-specific time trends in the prevalence of lifetime and 12-month use of plant-based hallucinogens and dissociative agents. Methods: Participants were respondents aged ≥ 12 years (N = 1,006,051) from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002-2019. Predictors were continuous years. Outcomes included illicit use of peyote, mescaline, psilocybin, ketamine, salvia, and tryptamine. Sociodemographic variables (gender; age; race/ethnicity; educational level; family income) were modeled as covariates. Trends were estimated overall and by age (12-17, 18-25, 26+). Prevalence differences [PDs] were obtained for each category, along with 95 % confidence intervals [CI]. Results: Increases in lifetime use were observed for psilocybin (2002-2019 PD=+1.61), tryptamine (2006-2014 PD=+0.55; 2015-2019 PD=+0.44), and ketamine (2006-2014 PD=+0.27; 2015-2019 PD=+0.21). Mescaline use decreased (PD = -0.89). While overall lifetime salvia use increased between 2006 and 2014 (PD=+1.81), prevalence did not change between 2015 and 2019. Twelve-month use of tryptamine and ketamine increased between 2006 and 2014 (PD=+0.14; +0.03, respectively). Twelve-month ketamine use also increased from 2015 to 2019 (PD=+0.03). By age, participants aged 12-17 and 18-25 showed decreases in use of most types of hallucinogens, but those age 26+ generally showed increases. Conclusions: While use of plant-based hallucinogens and dissociative agents remains rare, lifetime use of ketamine, tryptamine, and psilocybin is increasing in adults. Considering these increases alongside concerns about unsupervised use of illicit products whose dose and composition is uncertain, clinicians and policymakers should remain mindful of the rising rates of illicit use in the general population.

Adolescent and adult time trends in US hallucinogen use, 2002-19: any use, and use of ecstasy, LSD and PCP.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hallucinogen use is potentially harmful. Information on whether such use has increased in recent decades is lacking. This study assessed overall and age-specific time trends in the prevalence of 12-month hallucinogen use in the US general population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Data from the US National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002-19. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents aged ≥ 12 years (n = 1 006 051). MEASUREMENTS: Predictors were continuous years. Outcome variables included any hallucinogen use and use of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), ecstasy and phencyclidine (PCP) in the past year. Socio-demographic variables (gender, age, race/ethnicity, educational level and family income) were covariates. FINDINGS: Overall, hallucinogen use increased between 2015 and 2019 [prevalence difference (PD) = +0.44, P < 0.05]. Since 2002, hallucinogen use has increased in adults aged ≥ 26 years (PD, 2002-14 = +0.24, P < 0.05; PD, 2015-19 = +0.45, P < 0.001) and decreased in adolescents aged 12-17 years (PD, 2002-14 = -1.60, P < 0.0001; PD, 2015-19 = -0.73, P < 0.001). Ecstasy use has decreased in adolescents (PD, 2002-14 = -0.56, P < 0.001), adults aged 18-25 years (PD, 2015-19 = -0.96, P < 0.01) and ≥ 26 years (PD, 2015-19 = -0.13, P < 0.05). LSD use between 2002 and 2019 increased overall (PD = +0.71, P < 0.0001) and in all age groups (12-17: PD = +0.67, P < 0.001; 18-25: PD = +3.12, P < 0.0001; ≥ 26: PD = +0.36, P < 0.0001). Conversely, PCP use between 2002 and 2019 decreased overall (PD = -0.06, P < 0.001), in adolescents (PD = -0.24, P < 0.001) and young adults (PD = -0.32, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Since 2002, hallucinogen use in the United States has decreased among adolescents but increased in adults and is now estimated to affect more than 3 million adults aged 26+ years and more than 5.5 million adults aged 18+ years.

Item Response Theory Analyses of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Criteria Adapted to Screen Use Disorder: Exploratory Survey.

BACKGROUND: Screen use is part of daily life worldwide and morbidity related to excess use of screens has been reported. Some use of screens in excess could indicate a screen use disorder (ScUD). An integrative approach to ScUD could better fit the polymodal reality of screens, and concurrent problems with screens, than a split approach, activity by activity. In that paradigm, a pragmatic and operationalized approach to study a potential ScUD requires the use of common criteria, for all screens and activities done on screens, in a single questionnaire. OBJECTIVE: Our goals were (1) to describe screen uses in a general population sample and (2) to test the unidimensionality, local independence, and psychometric properties of the 9 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) internet gaming disorder (IGD) criteria adapted to screen use in a community sample. We hypothesized that the 9 DSM-5 IGD criteria adapted to ScUD would show unidimensionality, local independence, and good discrimination, with criteria distributed on the severity continuum. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey in a French suburban city targeted adults and adolescents. A self-administered questionnaire covered the main types of screens used and their use for various activities in the past month. Presence of ScUD diagnostic criteria in past 12 months was also self-evaluated in the questionnaire. Factor and 2-parameter Item Response Theory analysis were used to investigate the dimensionality, local independence, and psychometric properties of the ScUD criteria. RESULTS: Among the 300 participants, 171 (57.0%) were female (mean age 27 years), 297 (99.0%) used screens, 134 (44.7%) reported at least one criterion (potential problem users), and 5 (1.7%) reported 5 or more criteria and endorsed an ScUD. The most endorsed criteria were loss of control (60/300, 20.0%) and preoccupation (52/300, 17.3%). Screen types used and screen activities differed between participants with no ScUD criteria and those with at least one ScUD criterion. The latter were more likely to have a computer as the most used screen type, and more video gaming, communication/social network, and watching news and research of information as activities. Unidimensionality was confirmed by all fit indices. Local independence was confirmed by the absence of residual correlation between the items. Criteria had relatively high factor loading, with loss of interest in other recreational activities having the highest. However, criteria with the lowest factor loading all remained above the cut-offs, sanctioning unidimensionality. Most discriminating criteria were loss of interests, preoccupation, deceive/cover up, and risk/lose relationship/opportunities, which also provided the most information on the measurement of the latent trait. CONCLUSIONS: We described screen uses in a French community sample and have shown that the adaptation of the DSM-5 IGD to "ScUD" has good psychometric validity and is discriminating, confirming our hypothesis. We suggest to use those criteria to assess potential "ScUD." Further studies should determine if all criteria are needed and whether others should be added.