↓ Skip to main content

Medical cannabis use in Canada: vapourization and modes of delivery

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Medical cannabis use in Canada: vapourization and modes of delivery
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12954-016-0119-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samantha Shiplo, Mark Asbridge, Scott T. Leatherdale, David Hammond

Abstract

The mode of medical cannabis delivery-whether cannabis is smoked, vapourized, or consumed orally-may have important implications for its therapeutic efficacy and health risks. However, there is very little evidence on current patterns of use among Canadian medical cannabis users, particularly with respect to modes of delivery. The current study examined modes of medical cannabis delivery following regulatory changes in 2014 governing how Canadians access medical cannabis. A total of 364 approved adult Canadian medical cannabis users completed an online cross-sectional survey between April and June 2015. The survey examined patterns of medical cannabis use, modes of delivery used, and reasons for use. Participants were recruited through a convenience sample from nine Health Canada licensed producers. Using a vapourizer was the most popular mode of delivery for medical cannabis (53 %), followed by smoking a joint (47 %). The main reason for using a vapourizer was to reduce negative health consequences associated with smoking. A majority of current vapourizer users reported using a portable vapourizer (67.2 %), followed by a stationary vapourizer (41.7 %), and an e-cigarette or vape pen (19.3 %). Current use of a vapourizer was associated with fewer respiratory symptoms (AOR = 1.28, 95 % CI 1.05-1.56, p = 0.01). The findings suggest an increase in the popularity of vapourizers as the primary mode of delivery among approved medical users. Using vapourizers has the potential to prevent some of the adverse respiratory health consequences associated with smoking and may serve as an effective harm reduction method. Monitoring implications of such current and future changes to medical cannabis regulations may be beneficial to policymakers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 1 1%
Unknown 94 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 20 21%
Researcher 16 17%
Student > Master 16 17%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Other 9 9%
Other 24 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 29%
Unspecified 25 26%
Environmental Science 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Other 24 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2017.
All research outputs
#903,940
of 12,903,558 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#129
of 494 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,073
of 286,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#10
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,903,558 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 494 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,843 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.