Jakob Manthey, Maria Teresa Pons-Cabrera, Moritz Rosenkranz, Hugo Lopez-Pelayo
{"title":"Measuring cannabis quantities in online surveys: A rapid review and proposals for ways forward","authors":"Jakob Manthey, Maria Teresa Pons-Cabrera, Moritz Rosenkranz, Hugo Lopez-Pelayo","doi":"10.1002/mpr.1971","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Cannabis use quantities are relevant for determining cannabis-related harms. This research aims to provide an overview of the available methods to assess quantities through self-report.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A rapid review of various strategies to collect information on cannabis use quantities through self-report. Two independent literature searches resulted in <i>n</i> = 38 studies included for review.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of <i>n</i> = 14 studies employed methods for collecting cannabis use quantities that are not suitable for online surveys (e.g., rolling a fake joint). Of the remaining <i>n</i> = 24 studies with items that are suitable for online surveys, the quantity assessment was performed in three different ways. The data collection was either carried out by asking (a) for the total number of joints (i.e., crude joint method), (b) for the total weight (i.e., crude weight method), or (c) for specific products separately, for example, for the amount of flower and resin (i.e., product-specific method). In only <i>n</i> = 8 studies, cannabis use quantities were ascertained by providing visual aids (e.g., illustration of various amounts of flower).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The crude joint method and the product-specific method are the two most promising methods to collect information on cannabis use quantities. Using visual aids may potentially improve the accuracy of those methods.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50310,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mpr.1971","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mpr.1971","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
Cannabis use quantities are relevant for determining cannabis-related harms. This research aims to provide an overview of the available methods to assess quantities through self-report.
Methods
A rapid review of various strategies to collect information on cannabis use quantities through self-report. Two independent literature searches resulted in n = 38 studies included for review.
Results
A total of n = 14 studies employed methods for collecting cannabis use quantities that are not suitable for online surveys (e.g., rolling a fake joint). Of the remaining n = 24 studies with items that are suitable for online surveys, the quantity assessment was performed in three different ways. The data collection was either carried out by asking (a) for the total number of joints (i.e., crude joint method), (b) for the total weight (i.e., crude weight method), or (c) for specific products separately, for example, for the amount of flower and resin (i.e., product-specific method). In only n = 8 studies, cannabis use quantities were ascertained by providing visual aids (e.g., illustration of various amounts of flower).
Conclusions
The crude joint method and the product-specific method are the two most promising methods to collect information on cannabis use quantities. Using visual aids may potentially improve the accuracy of those methods.
期刊介绍：
The International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (MPR) publishes high-standard original research of a technical, methodological, experimental and clinical nature, contributing to the theory, methodology, practice and evaluation of mental and behavioural disorders. The journal targets in particular detailed methodological and design papers from major national and international multicentre studies. There is a close working relationship with the US National Institute of Mental Health, the World Health Organisation (WHO) Diagnostic Instruments Committees, as well as several other European and international organisations.
MPR aims to publish rapidly articles of highest methodological quality in such areas as epidemiology, biostatistics, generics, psychopharmacology, psychology and the neurosciences. Articles informing about innovative and critical methodological, statistical and clinical issues, including nosology, can be submitted as regular papers and brief reports. Reviews are only occasionally accepted.
MPR seeks to monitor, discuss, influence and improve the standards of mental health and behavioral neuroscience research by providing a platform for rapid publication of outstanding contributions. As a quarterly journal MPR is a major source of information and ideas and is an important medium for students, clinicians and researchers in psychiatry, clinical psychology, epidemiology and the allied disciplines in the mental health field.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
