Background: There is currently little evidence regarding the use of medical cannabis for the treatment of intractable pain. Literature published on the subject to date has yielded mixed results concerning the efficacy of medical cannabis and has been limited by study design and regulatory issues. Objective: The objective of this study was to determine if the use of medical cannabis affects the amount of opioids and benzodiazepines used by patients on a daily basis. Methods: This single-center, retrospective cohort study evaluated opioid and benzodiazepine doses over a 6-month time period for patients certified to use medical cannabis for intractable pain. All available daily milligram morphine equivalents (MMEs) and daily diazepam equivalents (DEs) were calculated at baseline and at 3 and 6 months. Results: A total of 77 patients were included in the final analysis. There was a statistically significant decrease in median MME from baseline to 3 months (−32.5 mg; P = 0.013) and 6 months (−39.1 mg; P = 0.001). Additionally, there was a non–statistically significant decrease in median DE at 3 months (−3.75 mg; P = 0.285) and no change in median DE from baseline to 6 months (−0 mg; P = 0.833). Conclusion and Relevance: Over the course of this 6-month retrospective study, patients using medical cannabis for intractable pain experienced a significant reduction in the number of MMEs available to use for pain control. No significant difference was noted in DE from baseline. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm or deny the opioid-sparing effects of medical cannabis when used to treat intractable pain.

This paper sought to understand the extent to which, and how individuals use personal or collective language when asked to articulate sense of place from a collective perspective. Understanding a collective sense of place could illuminate place-based connections in natural resource industries, where it is as groups or as institutions that organizations interact with the environment rather than as individuals. While there are well known methods for collecting information about sense of place at the individual level, there is a gap in understanding the best method to collect information at a collective level. We examined the use of key-informant interviews as a method to understand collective sense of place. In Bocas del Toro, Panama, ecotourism and environmentally based organizations are becoming more prolific due to abundant natural resources, making it an interesting case study for understanding sense of place from an organizational perspective. The use of personal and collective language is examined though in-depth semi-structured interviews from 15 environmentally-oriented organizations with a total of 17 interviews. This study specifically examined whether and how key informants, when prompted to speak for their organization, spoke collectively, reflecting a collective perspective versus their own. Methods included both quantitative analysis of personal versus collective language use frequency, and qualitative examinations of how individuals used personal versus collective language. Our results indicated no difference in the frequency with which individuals use personal versus collective language. We found that how individuals situated their perspectives into an organization reflects a complex personal and collective point of view reflecting five themes of personal versus collective language use: 1) sole personal perspective, 2) sole collective perspective, 3) distinction between collective and personal perspective; 4) organization perspective with insertion of “I think”; and 5) personal and collective perspective about organization and greater community. Our research identifies a previously undiscussed potential bias of key informant interviews. These findings have implications for how researchers approach collecting information beyond the individual level.

No abstract

Trust is a key variable for successful natural resource management and is commonly the focus of conceptual and methodological development. Distrust, on the other hand, is frequently cited as an obstacle to management, but appears to be rarely defined, conceptually underdeveloped, and inconsistently examined. This systematic review protocol (OSF preregistration https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GKUAW) was developed to answer two primary questions in relation to protected area and natural resource management: 1) How is distrust conceptualized, and 2) What methods are used to gather evidence of distrust? The aim is to provide a comprehensive overview of how distrust is theoretically developed and what questions are used to uncover distrust. Also, it will summarize findings on what leads to and results from distrust. Four academic and eight gray literature databases will be searched using Boolean keyword searches. Articles eligible for inclusion are those that present original research, gather and present evidence of distrust, and focus on protected areas and/or natural resource management. The review will result in a narrative synthesis that summarizes approaches to distrust within protected area and natural resource management.