Association of Local Cannabis Policy and Retail Availability With Cannabis Use and Problematic Cannabis Use Among Adolescents in Northern California.

IF 9.6 1区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Kelly C Young-Wolff,Alex Asera,Alisa A Padon,Natalie E Slama,Stacey E Alexeeff,Rosalie L Pacula,Cynthia I Campbell,Stacy A Sterling,Derek D Satre,Yun Lu,Wendy T Dyer,Monique B Does,Lynn D Silver
{"title":"Association of Local Cannabis Policy and Retail Availability With Cannabis Use and Problematic Cannabis Use Among Adolescents in Northern California.","authors":"Kelly C Young-Wolff,Alex Asera,Alisa A Padon,Natalie E Slama,Stacey E Alexeeff,Rosalie L Pacula,Cynthia I Campbell,Stacy A Sterling,Derek D Satre,Yun Lu,Wendy T Dyer,Monique B Does,Lynn D Silver","doi":"10.2105/ajph.2024.307787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives. To examine whether local cannabis policies and retail availability are associated with cannabis use and problematic cannabis use (PCU) among adolescents in Northern California. Methods. The sample comprised adolescents aged 13 to 17 years screened for past-year cannabis use during well-child visits in 2021. Exposures included local bans on cannabis storefront retailers, policy protectiveness, and retail proximity and density. Outcomes included self-reported past-year cannabis use and PCU diagnoses. Modified Poisson regression models adjusted for sociodemographics. Results. The sample (n = 103 134) was 51.1% male with a median age of 15 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 14-16 years); 5.5% self-reported cannabis use, and 0.3% had diagnosed PCU. Adolescents had a lower prevalence of cannabis use in jurisdictions that banned storefront retailers (adjusted prevalence rate [APR] = 0.857; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.814, 0.903 vs allowed), banned delivery (APR = 0.751; 95% CI = 0.710, 0.795 vs allowed), or had more policy protections (APR range = 0.705-0.800). Lower PCU prevalence was also found among those in jurisdictions that banned (vs allowed) storefront retailers (APR = 0.786; 95% CI = 0.629, 0.983) or delivery (APR = 0.783; 95% CI = 0.616, 0.996). Longer drive time and lower density of storefront retailers were associated with a lower cannabis use prevalence. Conclusions. More protective cannabis policies and less retail availability were associated with a lower prevalence of adolescent cannabis use and PCU. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S8):S654-S663. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307787).","PeriodicalId":7647,"journal":{"name":"American journal of public health","volume":"5 1","pages":"S654-S663"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of public health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2024.307787","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives. To examine whether local cannabis policies and retail availability are associated with cannabis use and problematic cannabis use (PCU) among adolescents in Northern California. Methods. The sample comprised adolescents aged 13 to 17 years screened for past-year cannabis use during well-child visits in 2021. Exposures included local bans on cannabis storefront retailers, policy protectiveness, and retail proximity and density. Outcomes included self-reported past-year cannabis use and PCU diagnoses. Modified Poisson regression models adjusted for sociodemographics. Results. The sample (n = 103 134) was 51.1% male with a median age of 15 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 14-16 years); 5.5% self-reported cannabis use, and 0.3% had diagnosed PCU. Adolescents had a lower prevalence of cannabis use in jurisdictions that banned storefront retailers (adjusted prevalence rate [APR] = 0.857; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.814, 0.903 vs allowed), banned delivery (APR = 0.751; 95% CI = 0.710, 0.795 vs allowed), or had more policy protections (APR range = 0.705-0.800). Lower PCU prevalence was also found among those in jurisdictions that banned (vs allowed) storefront retailers (APR = 0.786; 95% CI = 0.629, 0.983) or delivery (APR = 0.783; 95% CI = 0.616, 0.996). Longer drive time and lower density of storefront retailers were associated with a lower cannabis use prevalence. Conclusions. More protective cannabis policies and less retail availability were associated with a lower prevalence of adolescent cannabis use and PCU. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S8):S654-S663. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307787).
北加州青少年使用大麻和有问题使用大麻与当地大麻政策和零售量的关系。
目的。研究北加州青少年中当地大麻政策和零售量是否与大麻使用和问题大麻使用 (PCU) 相关。方法。样本包括在 2021 年儿童健康检查中筛查出过去一年使用大麻情况的 13 至 17 岁青少年。暴露因素包括当地对大麻店面零售商的禁令、政策保护力度以及零售店的距离和密度。结果包括自我报告的上一年大麻使用情况和 PCU 诊断。修正的泊松回归模型对社会人口统计学进行了调整。结果。样本(n = 103 134)中 51.1%为男性,中位年龄为 15 岁(四分位距 [IQR] = 14-16 岁);5.5% 自我报告吸食大麻,0.3% 已确诊 PCU。在禁止店面零售商(调整流行率 [APR] = 0.857; 95% 置信区间 [CI] = 0.814, 0.903 vs 允许)、禁止递送(调整流行率 [APR] = 0.751; 95% 置信区间 [CI] = 0.710, 0.795 vs 允许)或有更多政策保护(调整流行率 [APR] 范围 = 0.705-0.800)的辖区,青少年使用大麻的流行率较低。在禁止(与允许)店面零售商(APR = 0.786; 95% CI = 0.629, 0.983)或送货(APR = 0.783; 95% CI = 0.616, 0.996)的辖区,PCU 流行率也较低。较长的驾车时间和较低的店面零售商密度与较低的大麻使用流行率有关。结论。保护性更强的大麻政策和较少的零售供应与青少年使用大麻和 PCU 的流行率较低有关。(Am J Public Health.2024;114(S8):S654-S663. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307787).
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of public health
American journal of public health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
3.90%
发文量
1109
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Public Health (AJPH) is dedicated to publishing original work in research, research methods, and program evaluation within the field of public health. The journal's mission is to advance public health research, policy, practice, and education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信