Association of Marijuana Use and Cardiovascular Disease: A Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Data Analysis of 133,706 US Adults

Shah, Siddharth; Patel, Siddharth; Paulraj, Shweta; Chaudhuri, Debanik

doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2020.10.019

Cited by 26 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result of these different analytical choices, the two articles reached opposite conclusions: one paper reported that using a retrieval bag reduced infections ( Fields et al, 2019 ), and the other reported that it did not ( Turner et al, 2019 ; see also Childers and Maggard-Gibbons, 2021 ). This and other medical examples ( de Vries et al, 2010 ; Jivanji et al, 2020 ; Shah et al, 2021 ) illustrate how independent analysis of the same data can reach different, yet justifiable, conclusions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

Aczél

Szászi

Nilsonne

et al. 2021

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Any large dataset can be analyzed in a number of ways, and it is possible that the use of different analysis strategies will lead to different results and conclusions. One way to assess whether the results obtained depend on the analysis strategy chosen is to employ multiple analysts and leave each of them free to follow their own approach. Here, we present consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting such multi-analyst studies, and we discuss how broader adoption of the multi-analyst approach has the potential to strengthen the robustness of results and conclusions obtained from analyses of datasets in basic and applied research.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

Aczél

Szászi

Nilsonne

et al. 2021

eLife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Colorado and Washington, commercial marijuana legalization is significantly associated with increased rates of fatal motor vehicle accidents 66 . There is also evidence on the harms of marijuana secondhand smoke on cardiovascular health 67,68 . Use of high‐potency cannabis concentrate products has also been associated with negative consequences like psychosis and emergency department visits 69 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

County‐Level Recreational Marijuana Policies and Local Policy Changes in Colorado and Washington State (2012‐2019)

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2012, Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize recreational marijuana through voter‐initiated ballots. In these states, counties could restrict or ban local marijuana facilities through a variety of regulatory methods such as ordinances and zoning. County‐level recreational marijuana policies in Washington and Colorado vary substantially, with 69.2% of Washington counties and 23.4% of Colorado counties allowing all types of recreational marijuana facilities as of April 1, 2019. After Colorado and Washington legalized recreational marijuana, many counties modified their marijuana policies over time, with shifts in county policy often preceded by advocacy and information‐seeking activities. Context In 2012, Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize recreational marijuana. Both allowed local governments to further regulate the availability of marijuana facilities in their jurisdictions. As early adopters, these states are important quasi‐natural experiments to examine local marijuana policy and policy change processes, including key stakeholders and arguments. Methods We conducted a policy scan of county‐level recreational marijuana ordinances and regulations in Colorado and Washington. Data collected included policy documents from counties in both states and newspaper articles. We used a mixed‐methods approach to describe the types of county‐level recreational marijuana policies enacted by April 1, 2019; identify key policy stakeholders involved in local policy debates; and explore arguments used in support or opposition of county policies. We also selected four counties that represent three county policy environments (all marijuana facility types allowed, some marijuana facility types allowed, all marijuana facility types prohibited) and described the policy changes within these counties since recreational marijuana was legalized. Findings By April 1, 2019, Colorado counties were less likely than Washington counties to allow marijuana facilities—48.4% of Colorado counties prohibited recreational marijuana facilities in their jurisdiction compared to 23.1% of Washington counties. Since state legalization, several counties in both states have made substantial marijuana facility policy modifications, often preceded by information‐seeking activities. Primary stakeholders involved in policy debates included elected officials, law enforcement, individual growers/farmers, marijuana business license applicants, parents, and residents. Proponents referenced local economic gain, reduced crime, and potential health benefits of marijuana as arguments in favor of permitting local facilities, whereas opponents pointed to economic loss, negative health and public health issues, public safety concerns, and existing federal law. Both sides referenced local public opinion data to support their position. Conclusions By early 2019, a patchwork of local marijuana policies was in place in Colorado and Washington. We identify key areas of policy and public health research needed to inform future lo...

show abstract

“…Marijuana is one of the most frequently administrated psychoactive drugs in the global context. 1 As reported, the number of current marijuana smokers aged ≥12 years in the USA had grown from 6.2% in 2002 to 10.1% in 2018. 2 In view of the potential benefits of marijuana observed in a range of medical conditions (eg, epilepsy, pain symptom, multiple sclerosis, anxiety and depression), 33 states in the USA have legalised the use of marijuana for medical purposes; additionally, the District of Columbia and another 11 states have legalised marijuana for recreational purposes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Marijuana smoking and asthma: a protocol for a meta-analysis

Lei

Shao

2022

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionRecent studies have raised the concern on the risk of asthma in marijuana smokers; however, the results remain controversial and warrant further investigation. With a growing number of marijuana smokers, examining the association between marijuana smoking and asthma and quantifying such association through meta-analysis have important implications for public health and clinical decision-making. In view of this, the present protocol aims to detail a comprehensive plan of meta-analysis on the association aforementioned. The findings are expected to strengthen the current knowledge base pertaining to the potential adverse effects of marijuana smoking on pulmonary health and to facilitate the development of prevention strategies for asthma.Methods and analysisThe MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE databases will be searched systematically from inception to 1 September 2021 to retrieve the relevant observational studies focusing on the association between marijuana smoking and asthma. Both unadjusted and adjusted effect sizes, such as OR, relative risk, HR and the corresponding 95% CIs will be extracted for pooled analyses. Heterogeneity and publication bias across the included studies will be examined. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Scale will be used to assess the quality and risk of bias. Statistical software Review Manager V.5.3 and Stata V.11.0 will be used for statistical analyses.Ethics and disseminationSince no private and confidential patient data will be included in the reporting, approval from an ethics committee is not required. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal or disseminated in the relevant conferences. The study raises no ethical issue.OSF registration number10.17605/OSF.IO/UPTXC.

show abstract

Association of Marijuana Use and Cardiovascular Disease: A Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Data Analysis of 133,706 US Adults

Cited by 26 publications

References 24 publications

Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

Consensus-based guidance for conducting and reporting multi-analyst studies

County‐Level Recreational Marijuana Policies and Local Policy Changes in Colorado and Washington State (2012‐2019)

Marijuana smoking and asthma: a protocol for a meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About