↓ Skip to main content

US Adult Illicit Cannabis Use, Cannabis Use Disorder, and Medical Marijuana Laws: 1991-1992 to 2012-2013

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Psychiatry, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
40 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
148 X users
facebook
18 Facebook pages
googleplus
5 Google+ users
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
326 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
274 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
US Adult Illicit Cannabis Use, Cannabis Use Disorder, and Medical Marijuana Laws: 1991-1992 to 2012-2013
Published in
JAMA Psychiatry, June 2017
DOI 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.0724
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah S. Hasin, Aaron L. Sarvet, Magdalena Cerdá, Katherine M. Keyes, Malka Stohl, Sandro Galea, Melanie M. Wall

Abstract

Over the last 25 years, illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders have increased among US adults, and 28 states have passed medical marijuana laws (MML). Little is known about MML and adult illicit cannabis use or cannabis use disorders considered over time. To present national data on state MML and degree of change in the prevalence of cannabis use and disorders. Differences in the degree of change between those living in MML states and other states were examined using 3 cross-sectional US adult surveys: the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey (NLAES; 1991-1992), the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC; 2001-2002), and the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III; 2012-2013). Early-MML states passed MML between NLAES and NESARC ("earlier period"). Late-MML states passed MML between NESARC and NESARC-III ("later period"). Past-year illicit cannabis use and DSM-IV cannabis use disorder. Overall, from 1991-1992 to 2012-2013, illicit cannabis use increased significantly more in states that passed MML than in other states (1.4-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .004), as did cannabis use disorders (0.7-percentage point more; SE, 0.3; P = .03). In the earlier period, illicit cannabis use and disorders decreased similarly in non-MML states and in California (where prevalence was much higher to start with). In contrast, in remaining early-MML states, the prevalence of use and disorders increased. Remaining early-MML and non-MML states differed significantly for use (by 2.5 percentage points; SE, 0.9; P = .004) and disorder (1.1 percentage points; SE, 0.5; P = .02). In the later period, illicit use increased by the following percentage points: never-MML states, 3.5 (SE, 0.5); California, 5.3 (SE, 1.0); Colorado, 7.0 (SE, 1.6); other early-MML states, 2.6 (SE, 0.9); and late-MML states, 5.1 (SE, 0.8). Compared with never-MML states, increases in use were significantly greater in late-MML states (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.6; P = .01), California (1.8-percentage point more; SE, 0.9; P = .04), and Colorado (3.5-percentage point more; SE, 1.5; P = .03). Increases in cannabis use disorder, which was less prevalent, were smaller but followed similar patterns descriptively, with change greater than never-MML states in California (1.0-percentage point more; SE, 0.5; P = .06) and Colorado (1.6-percentage point more; SE, 0.8; P = .04). Medical marijuana laws appear to have contributed to increased prevalence of illicit cannabis use and cannabis use disorders. State-specific policy changes may also have played a role. While medical marijuana may help some, cannabis-related health consequences associated with changes in state marijuana laws should receive consideration by health care professionals and the public.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 148 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 272 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 38 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 11%
Student > Bachelor 31 11%
Student > Master 27 10%
Other 23 8%
Other 63 23%
Unknown 61 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 20%
Psychology 41 15%
Social Sciences 17 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 5%
Neuroscience 13 5%
Other 49 18%
Unknown 85 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 418. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2023.
All research outputs
#71,946
of 25,974,666 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Psychiatry
#208
of 5,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,576
of 334,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Psychiatry
#8
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,974,666 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 71.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,771 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.