Geographical clustering of cannabis use: Results from the New Zealand Mental Health Survey 2003–2004

Wells, J. Elisabeth; Degenhardt, Louisa; Bohnert, Kipling M.; Anthony, James C.; Scott, Kate M.

doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.09.002

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our estimates of clustering within communities of greatest socioeconomic advantage and least disorder as well as the clustering of making a purchase attempt were more similar to those observed by Delva et al (2000) in a study of clustering of alcohol consumption within-schools in Panama where the PWOR was 1.3. Wells et al (2008) estimated clustering of marijuana use to be 1.5 at the ‘meshblock’, or neighborhood, level but no clustering at the local authority level. Our estimates of within-community clustering, however, were at the level of the city and one might expect clustering within smaller geographic regions, e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Katz et al, 1993; Bobashev and Anthony, 2000; Delva et al, 2000; Petronis and Anthony, 2000, 2003; Preisser et al, 2003; Wells et al, 2008). Pairwise odds ratios (PWOR) estimated from ALR yield an interpretable statistical index that reflects how strongly underage drinking occurs in clusters (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dunlap and Johnson, 1992). More recently, researchers have demonstrated that cocaine use (Petronis and Anthony, 2000, 2003) and marijuana use (Bobashev and Anthony, 2000) clusters within US neighborhoods and cities while others have found evidence of clustering of inhalant use in Panama (Delva et al, 2000) and marijuana use in New Zealand (Wells et al, 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Geographic clustering of underage drinking and the influence of community characteristics

Reboussin

Preisser

Song

et al. 2010

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper was to examine the extent to which underage drinking clusters geographically in a sample of communities, and to investigate the manner in which community-level contexts are related to this process. We used data from a randomized community trial of underage drinking to provide the first quantitative estimates of the magnitude of the geographic clustering of underage drinking based upon pairwise odds ratios (PWORs). The Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws Randomized Community Trial provided data from repeated cross-sectional samples of youth aged 14-20 from 68 communities surveyed in 2004, 2006, and 2007 (n=18, 730). Past 30-day drinking, binge drinking, getting drunk, experiencing non-violent consequences as a result of drinking and making a purchase attempt all significantly clustered within-communities with PWORs ranging from 1.05 to 1.21. After adjustment for individual-level characteristics, results remained relatively unchanged. However, there was evidence that the magnitude of the clustering varied as a function of neighborhood disadvantage, neighborhood disorder, and family structure. Clustering of drunkenness and experiencing non-violent consequences as a result of drinking was greatest in the least economically disadvantaged and least disordered communities with the greatest percentage of married couple families. The clustering of making a purchase attempt, however, was greatest in more disordered communities, specifically the largest communities with the highest degree of residential mobility and housing density. These findings that clustering of underage drinking behaviors varies by community context has the potential for identifying the types of communities to target for underage drinking behavior-specific preventive interventions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Geographic clustering of underage drinking and the influence of community characteristics

Reboussin

Preisser

Song

et al. 2010

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clustering was estimated within communities using the ALR method developed by Carey and colleagues (1993) and implemented by other researchers in the area of drug use (e.g., Bobashev and Anthony, 2000;Delva et al, 2000;Anthony, 2000, 2003;Reboussin et al, 2010Reboussin et al, , 2011Wells et al, 2009). PWOR estimated from ALR refl ect how strongly behaviors co-occur in communities (referred to as clustering).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Influences on the Clustering of Underage Risky Drinking and Its Consequences in Communities

Reboussin

Song

Wolfson

2012

J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Objective: The purpose of this research was to examine whether the clustering of underage risky drinking and its consequences within communities might arise from shared perceptions regarding underage drinking as well as the social context of drinking. Method: The Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws Randomized Community Trial provided data from repeated cross-sectional samples of 5,017 current drinkers (2,619 male) ages 14-20 years from 68 communities surveyed in 2004, 2006, and 2007. Alternating logistic regressions were used to estimate the infl uence of social factors on the clustering of getting drunk, heavy episodic drinking, nonviolent consequences, and driving after drinking or riding with a drinking driver. Results: The clustering of getting drunk, heavy episodic drinking, and nonviolent consequences was no longer statistically signifi cant after adjustment for drinking with friends and drinking with parents. Parents providing alcohol explained the clustering of heavy episodic drinking and nonviolent consequences, whereas drinking with other underage drinkers and friends providing alcohol explained the clustering of nonviolent consequences. Drinking with friends or other underage drinkers and friends providing alcohol increased the risk of these behaviors, whereas drinking with parents and parents providing alcohol were protective. Perceptions regarding peer drinking, community norms, consequences for drinking, and drinking at a party did not infl uence clustering. Conclusions: These fi ndings suggest that interventions to reduce underage risky drinking in communities should focus on the differential effects of the social context in which drinking occurs. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, 73, 890-898, 2012)

show abstract

“…These and other individual factors explain a meaningful proportion of individual differences in marijuana use. However, recognition is growing that broad population-level factors such as those associated with schools, neighborhoods, and historical time periods, are also required in the etiologic model to provide a more complete explanation (28–30). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The social norms of birth cohorts and adolescent marijuana use in the United States, 1976–2007

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims Studies of the relationship between social norms and marijuana use have generally focused on individual attitudes, leaving the influence of larger societal-level attitudes unknown. The present study investigated societal-level disapproval of marijuana use defined by birth cohort or by time period. Design Combined analysis of nationally-representative annual surveys of secondary school students in the U.S. conducted 1976–2007 as part of the Monitoring the Future study. Setting In-school surveys completed by adolescents in the U.S. Participants 986,003 adolescents in grades 8, 10, and 12 Measurements Main predictors included the percentage of students who disapproved of marijuana in each birth cohort and time period. Multi-level models with individuals clustered in time periods of observation and birth cohorts were modeled, with past-year marijuana use as the outcome. Findings Results indicated a significant and strong effect of birth cohort disapproval of marijuana use in predicting individual risk of marijuana use, after controlling for individual-level disapproval, perceived norms towards marijuana, and other characteristics. For example, compared to birth cohorts in which most (87–90.9%) adolescents disapproved of marijuana use, odds of marijuana use were 3.53 times higher in cohorts where less than half (42–46.9%) disapproved (99% C.I. 2.75, 4.53). Conclusions Individuals in birth cohorts that are more disapproving of marijuana use are less likely to use, independent of their personal attitudes towards marijuana use. Social norms and attitudes regarding marijuana use cluster in birth cohorts, and this clustering has a direct effect on marijuana use even after controlling for individual attitudes and perceptions of norms.

show abstract

Geographical clustering of cannabis use: Results from the New Zealand Mental Health Survey 2003–2004

Cited by 14 publications

References 18 publications

Geographic clustering of underage drinking and the influence of community characteristics

Geographic clustering of underage drinking and the influence of community characteristics

Social Influences on the Clustering of Underage Risky Drinking and Its Consequences in Communities

The social norms of birth cohorts and adolescent marijuana use in the United States, 1976–2007

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About