8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Sociodemographic Characteristics Associated With and Prevalence and Frequency of Cannabis Use Among Adults in the US

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Key Points Question What are the sociodemographic characteristics of adults who engage in high-frequency cannabis use? Findings In this survey study including 387 157 US adults residing in 21 states conducted in 2016 through 2019, young, male, Black, and Native American individuals and individuals with low educational attainment and income were more likely to engage in higher frequency cannabis use. Meaning Higher-frequency use among these populations may warrant more attention from policymakers and public health officials in the form of screening, risk stratification, and treatment given the known and emerging adverse health effects of cannabis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references87

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Adverse Health Effects of Marijuana Use

          New England Journal of Medicine, 370(23), 2219-2227
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory.

            Multiple imputation (MI) and full information maximum likelihood (FIML) are the two most common approaches to missing data analysis. In theory, MI and FIML are equivalent when identical models are tested using the same variables, and when m, the number of imputations performed with MI, approaches infinity. However, it is important to know how many imputations are necessary before MI and FIML are sufficiently equivalent in ways that are important to prevention scientists. MI theory suggests that small values of m, even on the order of three to five imputations, yield excellent results. Previous guidelines for sufficient m are based on relative efficiency, which involves the fraction of missing information (gamma) for the parameter being estimated, and m. In the present study, we used a Monte Carlo simulation to test MI models across several scenarios in which gamma and m were varied. Standard errors and p-values for the regression coefficient of interest varied as a function of m, but not at the same rate as relative efficiency. Most importantly, statistical power for small effect sizes diminished as m became smaller, and the rate of this power falloff was much greater than predicted by changes in relative efficiency. Based our findings, we recommend that researchers using MI should perform many more imputations than previously considered sufficient. These recommendations are based on gamma, and take into consideration one's tolerance for a preventable power falloff (compared to FIML) due to using too few imputations.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              AmeliaII: A Program for Missing Data

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Network Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                2574-3805
                November 01 2021
                November 30 2021
                : 4
                : 11
                : e2136571
                Affiliations
                [1 ]formerly of Center for Tobacco Control Research & Education, University of California, San Francisco
                [2 ]Center for Tobacco Control Research & Education, University of California, San Francisco
                [3 ]Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco
                [4 ]Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
                [5 ]Section of Mental Health Services, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
                [6 ]Division of Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
                [7 ]Section of General Internal Medicine, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
                Article
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.36571
                f0feccfd-987b-4835-84c1-91ba96edb989
                © 2021
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article