公众对禁毒署提议重新安排大麻的态度:一项横断面混合方法分析。

Q1 Medicine
Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids Pub Date : 2025-06-06 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000546538
Rebecca H Lucas, Anna Nahirnyak, Jamie Piliero, Andrew M Peterson
{"title":"公众对禁毒署提议重新安排大麻的态度:一项横断面混合方法分析。","authors":"Rebecca H Lucas, Anna Nahirnyak, Jamie Piliero, Andrew M Peterson","doi":"10.1159/000546538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>On May 21, 2024, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published a proposed rule to reschedule marijuana from schedule I to III under the Controlled Substance Act (CSA), followed by a 60-day open comment period. The purpose of this study was to analyze the public attitudes regarding the proposed rule and identify trends based on time of comment submission and recurring arguments throughout the comments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an observational, cross-sectional, mixed-methods study. Comments from the proposal were stratified according to the submission date as early (May 21 to June 11), mid- (June 12 to July 2), and late (July 3-22) respondents. Investigators were assigned an equal number of comments to code as in favor of, against, or no clear position on rescheduling. Comments were further coded based on type of comment (form letters, personal anecdotes), rationale for comment (racism, decriminalization, safety, and economic factors), and whether descheduling was favored. Chi-square tests were used to analyze categorical data. A random sample of comments was selected to assure a 5% margin of error.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>More than 42,000 comments were submitted. Of these, 380 comments were selected and coded, with 42% (<i>n</i> = 158) in support of rescheduling, 55% (<i>n</i> = 211) against rescheduling, and 2.9% (<i>n</i> = 11) with no clear position. Of all comments coded, 71% wanted to go further and were in support of descheduling. The early responses consisted of a majority in favor of rescheduling, while the mid- and late responses consisted of more comments against rescheduling (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> [2, <i>N</i> = 369] = 35.8, <i>p</i> < 0.00001). Of the comments against rescheduling, a large majority supported descheduling (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> [2, <i>N</i> = 265] = 32.0, <i>p</i> < 0.0001). As for comment structure, 69% (<i>n</i> = 263) of all comments coded were form letters, while 8.4% (<i>n</i> = 32) were personal anecdotes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The number of comments in support of rescheduling decreased with time, only dominating the early respondent wave. Despite a larger number of negative attitudes toward the DEA's proposed rule of rescheduling marijuana from schedule I to III, a majority of comments supported taking a step further to deschedule marijuana all together.</p>","PeriodicalId":18415,"journal":{"name":"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids","volume":"8 1","pages":"117-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12252376/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public Attitudes Toward the Drug Enforcement Administration's Proposal to Reschedule Marijuana: A Cross-Sectional Mixed-Methods Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca H Lucas, Anna Nahirnyak, Jamie Piliero, Andrew M Peterson\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000546538\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>On May 21, 2024, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published a proposed rule to reschedule marijuana from schedule I to III under the Controlled Substance Act (CSA), followed by a 60-day open comment period. The purpose of this study was to analyze the public attitudes regarding the proposed rule and identify trends based on time of comment submission and recurring arguments throughout the comments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an observational, cross-sectional, mixed-methods study. Comments from the proposal were stratified according to the submission date as early (May 21 to June 11), mid- (June 12 to July 2), and late (July 3-22) respondents. Investigators were assigned an equal number of comments to code as in favor of, against, or no clear position on rescheduling. Comments were further coded based on type of comment (form letters, personal anecdotes), rationale for comment (racism, decriminalization, safety, and economic factors), and whether descheduling was favored. Chi-square tests were used to analyze categorical data. A random sample of comments was selected to assure a 5% margin of error.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>More than 42,000 comments were submitted. Of these, 380 comments were selected and coded, with 42% (<i>n</i> = 158) in support of rescheduling, 55% (<i>n</i> = 211) against rescheduling, and 2.9% (<i>n</i> = 11) with no clear position. Of all comments coded, 71% wanted to go further and were in support of descheduling. The early responses consisted of a majority in favor of rescheduling, while the mid- and late responses consisted of more comments against rescheduling (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> [2, <i>N</i> = 369] = 35.8, <i>p</i> < 0.00001). Of the comments against rescheduling, a large majority supported descheduling (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> [2, <i>N</i> = 265] = 32.0, <i>p</i> < 0.0001). As for comment structure, 69% (<i>n</i> = 263) of all comments coded were form letters, while 8.4% (<i>n</i> = 32) were personal anecdotes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The number of comments in support of rescheduling decreased with time, only dominating the early respondent wave. Despite a larger number of negative attitudes toward the DEA's proposed rule of rescheduling marijuana from schedule I to III, a majority of comments supported taking a step further to deschedule marijuana all together.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18415,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"117-129\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12252376/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546538\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546538","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:2024年5月21日,美国缉毒局(DEA)公布了一项拟议规则,将大麻从管制物质法案(CSA)的附表I重新安排到附表III,随后是60天的公开评论期。本研究的目的是分析公众对拟议规则的态度,并根据评论提交的时间和评论中反复出现的争论来确定趋势。方法:这是一项观察性、横断面、混合方法研究。该提案的意见根据提交日期分为早期(5月21日至6月11日),中期(6月12日至7月2日)和晚期(7月3日至22日)。调查人员被分配了相同数量的评论代码,赞成,反对,或没有明确的立场,重新安排。根据评论的类型(格式信件、个人轶事)、评论的理由(种族主义、非犯罪化、安全和经济因素)以及是否赞成取消日程安排,评论进一步编码。使用卡方检验分析分类数据。为了保证5%的误差范围,我们选择了一个随机的评论样本。结果:提交了超过42,000条评论。其中,选择并编码了380条评论,其中42% (n = 158)支持重新调度,55% (n = 211)反对重新调度,2.9% (n = 11)没有明确立场。在所有编码的评论中,71%的人想要更进一步,并支持取消调度。早期的回复包括大多数赞成重新安排,而中期和后期的回复包括更多反对重新安排的评论(x2 [2, N = 369] = 35.8, p < 0.00001)。在反对重新调度的评论中,绝大多数支持重新调度(x2 [2, N = 265] = 32.0, p < 0.0001)。在评论结构方面,69% (n = 263)的评论为格式信件,8.4% (n = 32)的评论为个人轶事。结论:支持改期的评论数量随时间的推移而减少,仅占早期回复的主导地位。尽管对DEA提议的将大麻从附表1重新安排到附表3的规则持负面态度的人数较多,但大多数评论支持采取进一步措施将大麻全部取消。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Public Attitudes Toward the Drug Enforcement Administration's Proposal to Reschedule Marijuana: A Cross-Sectional Mixed-Methods Analysis.

Introduction: On May 21, 2024, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published a proposed rule to reschedule marijuana from schedule I to III under the Controlled Substance Act (CSA), followed by a 60-day open comment period. The purpose of this study was to analyze the public attitudes regarding the proposed rule and identify trends based on time of comment submission and recurring arguments throughout the comments.

Methods: This was an observational, cross-sectional, mixed-methods study. Comments from the proposal were stratified according to the submission date as early (May 21 to June 11), mid- (June 12 to July 2), and late (July 3-22) respondents. Investigators were assigned an equal number of comments to code as in favor of, against, or no clear position on rescheduling. Comments were further coded based on type of comment (form letters, personal anecdotes), rationale for comment (racism, decriminalization, safety, and economic factors), and whether descheduling was favored. Chi-square tests were used to analyze categorical data. A random sample of comments was selected to assure a 5% margin of error.

Results: More than 42,000 comments were submitted. Of these, 380 comments were selected and coded, with 42% (n = 158) in support of rescheduling, 55% (n = 211) against rescheduling, and 2.9% (n = 11) with no clear position. Of all comments coded, 71% wanted to go further and were in support of descheduling. The early responses consisted of a majority in favor of rescheduling, while the mid- and late responses consisted of more comments against rescheduling (X 2 [2, N = 369] = 35.8, p < 0.00001). Of the comments against rescheduling, a large majority supported descheduling (X 2 [2, N = 265] = 32.0, p < 0.0001). As for comment structure, 69% (n = 263) of all comments coded were form letters, while 8.4% (n = 32) were personal anecdotes.

Conclusion: The number of comments in support of rescheduling decreased with time, only dominating the early respondent wave. Despite a larger number of negative attitudes toward the DEA's proposed rule of rescheduling marijuana from schedule I to III, a majority of comments supported taking a step further to deschedule marijuana all together.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids
Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信