↓ Skip to main content

Brief interventions for cannabis use in emerging adults: protocol for a systematic review, meta-analysis, and evidence map

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Brief interventions for cannabis use in emerging adults: protocol for a systematic review, meta-analysis, and evidence map
Published in
Systematic Reviews, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0772-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jillian Halladay, Tashia Petker, Allan Fein, Catharine Munn, James MacKillop

Abstract

Rates of cannabis use are highest during emerging adulthood (age 18-25), with the prevalence of near daily and daily increasing among this age group. Emerging adults are clinically challenging in terms of harmful cannabis use due to perceptions of high rates of peer use, social acceptance, and low risk of harm. Brief interventions to increase awareness and promote motivation to change are therefore particularly important for this age group. There is existing evidence on the effectiveness of brief interventions for alcohol in emerging adults, but it is not clear if comparable evidence is present for cannabis. The objective of this systematic review is to summarize and critically appraise the existing literature of brief interventions for cannabis use both narratively, to describe the content and delivery of existing interventions, and meta-analytically, to determine the aggregated efficacy of these interventions on cannabis use and other outcomes (e.g., other substance use, mental health, help-seeking behaviors, and academic and occupational outcomes). A systematic search of randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental trials, and pre-post designs will be conducted in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO. Ongoing trials will be identified using the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov , and Current Controlled Trials. Unpublished trials will be identified using Proquest Dissertations, OpenGrey, Google Scholar, and brief interventions on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration webpage. Two authors will independently screen and extract data from articles using a predetermined screening and extraction forms (which will include risk of bias assessments). Calibration exercises will be performed prior to full screening and extraction. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or consultation with a third reviewer. All studies will be reported narratively, and if appropriate, we will perform random effects meta-analyses with subgroup analyses and meta-regression. Results of this review are expected to provide guidance on the content, delivery methods, and effectiveness of brief interventions for cannabis use to assist post-secondary institutions in identifying brief intervention strategies to implement prior to or in response to legalization. CRD42018085412.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 13%
Researcher 6 9%
Librarian 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 20 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 24 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 17 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,907,905
of 15,922,938 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#389
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,180
of 279,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 279,399 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them