2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.11.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Latent classes of polysubstance use among adolescents—a systematic review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

31
181
3
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 189 publications
(216 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
31
181
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar to previous studies (Tomczyk et al, 2016), results revealed that AO was the most prevalent substance-use typology among adolescent populations. Yet, we documented that concurrent substance use was also common among U.S. adolescents, making up 42% of past-month substance use.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Similar to previous studies (Tomczyk et al, 2016), results revealed that AO was the most prevalent substance-use typology among adolescent populations. Yet, we documented that concurrent substance use was also common among U.S. adolescents, making up 42% of past-month substance use.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The variability in results in the current literature may be due to differences in the sample (e.g., age, region, racial/ethnic composition), operationalization of substance use (which ranges from past two weeks to lifetime use), methodology (e.g., mixture modeling versus population estimates), and the typology of concurrent use examined (Conway et al, 2013; Tomczyk et al, 2016). Only one study to date has examined membership in all possible classes of single and concurrent use of alcohol, marijuana, and cigarettes based on sex and race/ethnicity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As shown in a recent review article [28,] the measurements of polydrug use vary notably, indicating that there is no established practice of how polydrug use is measured. Therefore, in order to demonstrate how distinct prevalence estimates different measurements provide, 4 measures (variables) representing different degrees of strictness were formed.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%