Validation of self-reported cannabis dose and potency: an ecological study

被引:68
作者
van der Pol, Peggy [1 ]
Liebregts, Nienke [2 ]
de Graaf, Ron [1 ]
Korf, Dirk J. [2 ]
van den Brink, Wim [3 ]
van Laar, Margriet [1 ]
机构
[1] Netherlands Inst Mental Hlth & Addict, Trimbos Inst, NL-3500 AS Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Fac Law, Bonger Inst Criminol, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Psychiat, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
quantity; THC; self-report; Dose; validation; potency; DEPENDENCE; QUANTITY; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1111/add.12226
中图分类号
R194 [卫生标准、卫生检查、医药管理];
学科分类号
摘要
Aims To assess the reliability and validity of self-reported cannabis dose and potency measures. Design Cross-sectional study comparing self-reports with objective measures of amount of cannabis and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration. Setting Ecological study with assessments at participants' homes or in a coffee shop. Participants Young adult frequent cannabis users (n = 106) from the Dutch Cannabis Dependence (CanDep) study. Measurements The objectively measured amount of cannabis per joint (dose in grams) was compared with self-reported estimates using a prompt card and average number of joints made from 1 g of cannabis. In addition, objectively assessed THC concentration in the participant's cannabis was compared with self-reported level of intoxication, subjective estimate of cannabis potency and price per gram of cannabis. Findings Objective estimates of doses per joint (0.07-0.88 g/joint) and cannabis potency (1.1-24.7%) varied widely. Self-reported measures of dose were imprecise, but at group level, average dose per joint was estimated accurately with the number of joints made from 1 g [limit of agreement (LOA) = -0.02 g, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.29; 0.26], whereas the prompt card resulted in serious underestimation (LOA = 0.14 g, 95% CI = -0.10; 0.37). THC concentration in cannabis was associated with subjective potency ['average' 3.77% (P = 0.002) and '(very) strong' 5.13% more THC (P < 0.001) than '(very) mild' cannabis] and with cannabis price (about 1% increase in THC concentration per euro spent on 1 g of cannabis, P < 0.001), but not with level of intoxication. Conclusions Self-report measures relating to cannabis use appear at best to be associated weakly with objective measures. Of the self-report measures, number of joints per gram, cannabis price and subjective potency have at least some validity.
引用
收藏
页码:1801 / 1808
页数:8
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2000, CONCORD: Stata module for concordance correlation
[2]   Talk is cheap: Measuring drinking outcomes in clinical trials [J].
Babor, TF ;
Steinberg, K ;
Anton, R ;
Del Boca, F .
JOURNAL OF STUDIES ON ALCOHOL, 2000, 61 (01) :55-63
[3]   Opposite Effects of Δ-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol on Human Brain Function and Psychopathology [J].
Bhattacharyya, Sagnik ;
Morrison, Paul D. ;
Fusar-Poli, Paolo ;
Martin-Santos, Rocio ;
Borgwardt, Stefan ;
Winton-Brown, Toby ;
Nosarti, Chiara ;
O'Carroll, Colin M. ;
Seal, Marc ;
Allen, Paul ;
Mehta, Mitul A. ;
Stone, James M. ;
Tunstall, Nigel ;
Giampietro, Vincent ;
Kapur, Shitij ;
Murray, Robin M. ;
Zuardi, Antonio W. ;
Crippa, Jose A. ;
Atakan, Zerrin ;
McGuire, Philip K. .
NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2010, 35 (03) :764-774
[4]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[5]  
Cascini Fidelia, 2012, Curr Drug Abuse Rev, V5, P32
[6]   Price and purity analysis for illicit drug: Data and conceptual issues [J].
Caulkins, Jonathan P. .
DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE, 2007, 90 :S61-S68
[7]   Relationships between frequency and quantity of marijuana use and last year proxy dependence among adolescents and adults in the United States [J].
Chen, K ;
Kandel, DB ;
Davies, M .
DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE, 1997, 46 (1-2) :53-67
[8]  
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), 2004, EMCDDA INS
[9]  
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), 2012, EMCDDA INS
[10]  
Grant B.F., 2003, SOURCE ACCURACY STAT