No abstract

Background: Despite limited data demonstrating pronounced negative effects of prenatal cannabis exposure, popular opinion and public policies still reflect the belief that cannabis is fetotoxic. Methods:This article provides a critical review of results from longitudinal studies examining the impact of prenatal cannabis exposure on multiple domains of cognitive functioning in individuals aged 0 to 22 years. A literature search was conducted through PsycINFO, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Articles were included if they examined the cognitive performance of offspring exposed to cannabis in utero.Results: An examination of the total number of statistical comparisons (n = 1,001) between groups of participants that were exposed to cannabis prenatally and non-exposed controls revealed that those exposed performed differently on a minority of cognitive outcomes (worse on <3.5 percent and better in <1 percent). The clinical significance of these findings appears to be limited because cognitive performance scores of cannabis-exposed groups overwhelmingly fell within the normal range when compared against normative data adjusted for age and education. Conclusions:The current evidence does not suggest that prenatal cannabis exposure alone is associated with clinically significant cognitive functioning impairments.

The poor ability of the MAYSI-2 and YSR to discriminate and specify disorders is likely to reflect the high rates of co-morbidity. The fact that 90% of the participants reached the caution cut-off for any scale on the MAYSI-2, while suggesting its limited use as a screening tool for this sample, is probably best reflective of the high levels of psychopathology of incarcerated young people in England and Wales since particular efforts to divert as many as possible from custody. A more holistic and comprehensive approach to assessing health needs on admission into custody may be necessary for such a population.

ObjectiveTo investigate changes in mental health and other needs, as well as clinical and diagnostic ‘caseness’, in a sample of adolescents over a 6-month period following entry into a Young Offenders Institution in the UK.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingOne Young Offenders Institution between November 2006 and August 2009.Participants219 male adolescents aged 15–18 years (M=16.56; SD=0.6) were assessed at baseline (median=4; range 0–26 days following reception into custody) on the Salford Needs Assessment Schedule for Adolescents (SNASA) and Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS). Participants were then reassessed at 3-month and 6-month postbaseline to document any change in mental health.ResultsOf the initial baseline sample, 132 were still in the study at 3-month postbaseline and 63 were still available for assessment at 6 months. There were no differences between those who were not available for assessment at the three key stages in terms of demographic and criminological data. Over time there was a general improvement in mental health. While the proportion of participants with a mental health need (SNASA) did not change over time, symptom severity as measured by the SNASA did reduce significantly. When we assessed diagnostic ‘caseness’ using the K-SADS, three young people showed significant mental health deterioration.ConclusionsIn line with previous studies, we found that symptoms in prison generally improved over time. Prison may provide an opportunity for young people previously leading chaotic lifestyles to settle into a stable routine and engage with services; however, it is unclear if these would be maintained either within the prison or on release into the community.