Cannabis Vaping Among Youth and Young Adults: a Scoping Review

Harrell, Melissa B.; Clendennen, Stephanie L.; Sumbe, Aslesha; Case, Kathleen; Mantey, Dale S.; Swan, Sunaina

doi:10.1007/s40429-022-00413-y

Cited by 37 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 216 publications

(250 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most systematic reviews assessed youth and adult cannabis use as the primary outcome, including one rapid review (O'Grady, 2022), four narrative reviews (Lachance, 2022;Pacula, 2022;, and two meta-analyses . Harrell et al (Harrell, 2022) also examined cannabis use as part of a larger scoping review of factors linked to vaping, and Pacula and colleagues (Pacula, 2022; investigated alcohol use both alone and in combination with cannabis, updating an earlier review by Guttmannova et al . While the reviews' findings are mixed, two broad generalizations hold: increases in cannabis use, when observed, were more likely (i) among young adults than adolescents and (ii) following passage of recreational versus medical cannabis laws.…”

Section: Existing Egms And/or Relevant Systematic Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map

Sevigny,

Greathouse,

Medhin

2023

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGlobally, cannabis laws and regulations are rapidly changing. Countries are increasingly permitting access to cannabis under various decriminalization, medicalization, and legalization laws. With strong economic, public health, and social justice incentives driving these domestic cannabis policy reforms, liberalization trends are bound to continue. However, despite a large and growing body of interdisciplinary research addressing the policy‐relevant health, safety, and socioeconomic consequences of cannabis liberalization, there is a lack of robust primary and systematic research that comprehensively investigates the consequences of these reforms.ObjectivesThis evidence and gap map (EGM) summarizes the empirical evidence on cannabis liberalization policies. Primary objectives were to develop a conceptual framework linking cannabis liberalization policies to relevant outcomes, descriptively summarize the empirical evidence, and identify areas of evidence concentration and gaps.Search MethodsWe comprehensively searched for eligible English‐language empirical studies published across 23 academic databases and 11 gray literature sources through August 2020. Additions to the pool of potentially eligible studies from supplemental sources were made through November 2020.Selection CriteriaThe conceptual framework for this EGM draws upon a legal epidemiological perspective highlighting the causal effects of law and policy on population‐level outcomes. Eligible interventions include policies that create or expand access to a legal or decriminalized supply of cannabis: comprehensive medical cannabis laws (MCLs), limited medical cannabidiol laws (CBDLs), recreational cannabis laws (RCLs), industrial hemp laws (IHLs), and decriminalization of cultivations laws (DCLs). Eligible outcomes include intermediate responses (i.e., attitudes/behaviors and markets/environments) and longer‐term consequences (health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes) of these laws.Data Collection and AnalysisBoth dual screening and dual data extraction were performed with third person deconfliction. Primary studies were appraised using the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale and systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR 2.Main ResultsThe EGM includes 447 studies, comprising 438 primary studies and nine systematic reviews. Most research derives from the United States, with little research from other countries. By far, most cannabis liberalization research focuses on the effects of MCLs and RCLs. Studies targeting other laws—including CBDLs, IHLs, and DCLs—are relatively rare. Of the 113 distinct outcomes we documented, cannabis use was the single most frequently investigated. More than half these outcomes were addressed by three or fewer studies, highlighting substantial evidence gaps in the literature. The systematic evidence base is relatively small, comprising just seven completed reviews on cannabis use (3), opioid‐related harms (3), and alcohol‐related outcomes (1). Moreover, we have limited confidence in the reviews, as five were appraised as minimal quality and two as low quality.Authors’ ConclusionsMore primary and systematic research is needed to better understand the effects of cannabis liberalization laws on longer‐term—and arguably more salient—health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes. Since most research concerns MCLs and RCLs, there is a critical need for research on the societal impacts of industrial hemp production, medical CBD products, and decriminalized cannabis cultivation. Future research should also prioritize understanding the heterogeneous effects of these laws given differences in specific provisions and implementation across jurisdictions.

show abstract

Section: Existing Egms And/or Relevant Systematic Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map

Sevigny,

Greathouse,

Medhin

2023

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent review article found that cannabis vaping is more common among young adults than older adults. 16 Further, national estimates from the 2019 Monitoring the Future College Students and Young Adults Survey showed that 14% of college students and 17% of nonstudents reported past month cannabis vaping which is a substantial increase from 5% to 8% in 2017, respectively. 17 College students who used cannabis more frequently in the past year were over three times more likely to report cannabis vaping than not vaping, 18 indicating this may be a popular ROA for young adults.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the intersection of sexual identity and route of administration in relation to cannabis use among young adult females

Ehlke,

Fitzer,

Shipley

et al. 2023

American J Addict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and ObjectiveRates of cannabis use continue to increase with sexual minority women (SMW) reporting greater use than heterosexual women. Along with these increasing trends, the routes of administration (ROA) for cannabis are evolving. The current study examined associations between cannabis ROA and frequency of use, as well as differences across sexual identity (heterosexual vs. SMW).MethodsParticipants were 949 young adult (18–25 years old) women (29.8% SMW) who reported past month cannabis use and were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. Number of cannabis use days and each ROA used (joint, pipe, blunt, bong, vape, edible, and ointment) in the past 30 days were measured. Analysis of covariance models examined if sexual identity moderated the association between each ROA and cannabis use frequency.ResultsAmong the full sample, joints were the most common ROA (78.6%); cannabis vaping was the most common noncombustible ROA (25.9%). SMW were more likely than heterosexual women to use each ROA except for joints. SMW who used pipes or edibles reported greater cannabis use frequency, compared to those who did not; there were no differences in frequency of use across ROA for heterosexual women.Discussion and ConclusionsSMW may use a greater variety of ROA, potentially increasing the harms associated with cannabis. Marketing strategies targeting the sexual minority community may increase the likelihood of using various cannabis ROA and subsequent use.Scientific SignificanceFindings further our knowledge about how young adult women are using cannabis, and highlight how ROA may contribute to the disparities observed among SMW.

show abstract

“…Multiple reviews and studies found an increasing prevalence of cannabis vaping among the general population in the U.S. and Canada in the past decade [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 ]. A 2018 nationally representative survey of 131,807 U.S. adults found that 1.3% reported vaping cannabis in the past month and, among people who used nicotine ‘e-cigarettes’, 7.1% reported vaping cannabis in the past month [ 7 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A 2018 nationally representative survey of 131,807 U.S. adults found that 1.3% reported vaping cannabis in the past month and, among people who used nicotine ‘e-cigarettes’, 7.1% reported vaping cannabis in the past month [ 7 ]. Three recent reviews reported an increasing number of young people vaped cannabis using a personal vaporizer or e-cigarettes between 2013 to 2021 in the U.S. and Canada [ 6 , 8 , 9 ]. A meta-analysis of 17 national studies showed the past month pooled prevalence of cannabis vaping has increased by 5-fold from 1.6% in 2013–2016 to 8.4% in 2019–2020 [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trends and Socio-Demographic Differences of Cannabis Vaping in the USA and Canada

Lim

Chan

Wadsworth

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the rise in cannabis vaping, it is important to highlight the heterogeneity in vaping different cannabis product because of the potential differences in their health risks. This study aims to estimate the trends and socio-demographic correlates of the use of various cannabis vaping products across jurisdiction with different legal status. Data from the 2018 (n = 27,169) and 2019 (n = 47,747) waves of the International Cannabis Policy Study (ICPS) were used. Respondents aged 16–65 completed web-based surveys. In 2019, proportions of past year vaping of cannabis oil, dried flower and concentrates in the overall sample were highest in U.S. jurisdictions where cannabis was legalized for non-medical use (17.4%, 6.0%, 4.9%), followed by U.S. jurisdiction where non-medical cannabis use is illegal (13.7%, 5.8%, 2.9%), and lowest in Canada (8.1%, 4.4%, 2.1%). Vaping dried flower decreased from 2019 to 2018 in U.S. legal jurisdictions and Canada, while vaping cannabis oil and concentrates increased in all jurisdictions (p < 0.001). The odds of vaping all forms of products were higher among younger respondents (16–55 years), males, respondents with some college education, and persons with low-risk perceptions on daily cannabis vaping. In both ICPS surveys (2018 and 2019), cannabis oil was the most frequently vaped products, followed by dried flower, and concentrates. Detailed measures of product forms for cannabis vaping should be considered in future surveys.

show abstract

Cannabis Vaping Among Youth and Young Adults: a Scoping Review

Cited by 37 publications

References 216 publications

Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map

Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map

Exploring the intersection of sexual identity and route of administration in relation to cannabis use among young adult females

Trends and Socio-Demographic Differences of Cannabis Vaping in the USA and Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About