• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

测试大麻保护性行为策略与大麻相关后果的前因之间的交互效应。

A Test of Interaction Effects Between Cannabis Protective Behavioral Strategies and Antecedents of Cannabis-Related Consequences.

机构信息

Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.

出版信息

J Psychoactive Drugs. 2022 Jan-Mar;54(1):61-69. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2021.1909188. Epub 2021 Apr 17.

DOI:10.1080/02791072.2021.1909188
PMID:33870870
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8522187/
Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to examine tests of interaction effects between cannabis protective behavioral strategies use and a range of risk/protective factors for negative cannabis-related consequences. We recruited 2,226 college students ( = 20.28,  = 3.37; 68.8% female; 75.4% White) from 10 universities throughout the U.S. who reported using cannabis in the past month to complete an online survey. Measures assessed cannabis use, negative cannabis-related consequences, cannabis protective behavioral strategies use, and 35 risk/protective factors (including socio-demographic characteristics). Cannabis protective behavioral strategies use was negatively correlated with negative cannabis-related consequences while including the risk/protective factors as covariates. Most importantly, 33% and 54% of the interaction effects tested were statistically significant, depending on the covariates entered into the model. The interaction effects had a consistent pattern such that the positive association between greater risk and negative cannabis-related consequences was weaker as cannabis protective behavioral strategies use increased. Findings suggest that the nature of these interaction effects is not specific for any given risk/protective factor. We draw parallels to research on alcohol protective behavioral strategies and offer suggestions for moving the cannabis protective behavioral strategies field forward.

摘要

本研究的目的是检验大麻保护性行为策略的使用与一系列负面大麻相关后果的风险/保护因素之间的交互作用测试。我们从美国的 10 所大学招募了 2226 名大学生( = 20.28, = 3.37;女性占 68.8%;75.4%为白人),他们在过去一个月内报告使用过大麻,以完成在线调查。调查评估了大麻的使用、负面的大麻相关后果、大麻保护性行为策略的使用以及 35 个风险/保护因素(包括社会人口统计学特征)。大麻保护性行为策略的使用与负面的大麻相关后果呈负相关,而将风险/保护因素作为协变量纳入模型。最重要的是,取决于纳入模型的协变量,33%和 54%的交互作用效应在统计上是显著的。交互作用效应具有一致的模式,即随着大麻保护性行为策略的使用增加,风险与负面大麻相关后果之间的正相关关系减弱。研究结果表明,这些交互作用效应的性质不是针对任何特定的风险/保护因素。我们借鉴了关于酒精保护性行为策略的研究,并提出了推动大麻保护性行为策略领域发展的建议。

相似文献

1
A Test of Interaction Effects Between Cannabis Protective Behavioral Strategies and Antecedents of Cannabis-Related Consequences.测试大麻保护性行为策略与大麻相关后果的前因之间的交互效应。
J Psychoactive Drugs. 2022 Jan-Mar;54(1):61-69. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2021.1909188. Epub 2021 Apr 17.
2
An examination of the effects of ADHD symptoms and sex on the relation between cannabis protective behavioral strategies and cannabis consequences.考察 ADHD 症状和性别对大麻保护性行为策略与大麻后果之间关系的影响。
Addict Behav. 2023 Sep;144:107718. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2023.107718. Epub 2023 Apr 8.
3
A test of interaction effects between alcohol protective behavioral strategies and antecedents of alcohol-related consequences.检验酒精保护性行为策略与酒精相关后果的前因之间的交互作用效应。
Addict Behav. 2021 Mar;114:106707. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106707. Epub 2020 Oct 13.
4
Use of Both Alcohol and Cannabis Protective Behavioral Strategies is Associated with Fewer Negative Consequences: A Moderation Analysis.同时使用酒精和大麻保护性行为策略与较少的负面后果相关:一项调节分析。
Subst Use Misuse. 2023;58(8):989-995. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2023.2201842. Epub 2023 Apr 19.
5
Profiles of alcohol and cannabis protective behavioral strategies use across two large, multi-site college student samples of concurrent alcohol and cannabis users.在两个大型、多地点的同时使用酒精和大麻的大学生样本中,研究了酒精和大麻保护性行为策略的使用情况。
Addict Behav. 2023 Nov;146:107789. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2023.107789. Epub 2023 Jun 29.
6
A comparison of cannabis protective behavioral strategies use across cultures and sex.不同文化和性别人群中大麻保护行为策略的比较。
Addict Behav. 2021 Sep;120:106966. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.106966. Epub 2021 Apr 28.
7
Regulate yourself: Emotion regulation and protective behavioral strategies in substance use behaviors.自我调节:物质使用行为中的情绪调节和保护性行为策略。
Addict Behav. 2019 May;92:95-101. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.12.020. Epub 2018 Dec 19.
8
Evaluating the Protective Behavioral Strategies for Marijuana Scale (PBSM) short-form: Support for a two-factor structure and measurement invariance.评估大麻保护行为策略量表(PBSM)短式版:对两因素结构和测量不变性的支持。
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2022 Jul 1;236:109489. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2022.109489. Epub 2022 May 4.
9
Who's at greatest risk? Latent profiles of alcohol and cannabis use and related consequences among college students.谁的风险最大?大学生中酒精和大麻使用及其相关后果的潜在特征。
Addict Behav. 2023 Feb;137:107536. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107536. Epub 2022 Oct 30.
10
The Associations of Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Need Frustration with Cannabis-Related Outcomes in a Multi-Site Sample of College Students.多地点大学生样本中基本心理需求满足与挫折与大麻相关结果的关联。
J Psychoactive Drugs. 2024 Apr-Jun;56(2):177-186. doi: 10.1080/02791072.2023.2191605. Epub 2023 Mar 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Text message-delivered cannabis use disorder treatment with young adults: A large randomized clinical trial.针对年轻人的短信传递式大麻使用障碍治疗:一项大型随机临床试验。
J Subst Use Addict Treat. 2025 Mar;170:209611. doi: 10.1016/j.josat.2024.209611. Epub 2024 Dec 25.
2
A comparison of cannabis protective behavioral strategies use across cultures and sex.不同文化和性别人群中大麻保护行为策略的比较。
Addict Behav. 2021 Sep;120:106966. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.106966. Epub 2021 Apr 28.

本文引用的文献

1
Perceived discrimination and alcohol-related problems among Hispanic college students: The protective role of serious harm reduction behaviors.西班牙裔大学生感知歧视与酒精相关问题:严重危害减少行为的保护作用。
J Ethn Subst Abuse. 2022 Jan-Mar;21(1):272-283. doi: 10.1080/15332640.2020.1747040. Epub 2020 Apr 13.
2
Insomnia symptoms, cannabis protective behavioral strategies, and hazardous cannabis use among U.S. college students.美国大学生的失眠症状、大麻保护性行为策略和危险大麻使用。
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2019 Aug;27(4):309-317. doi: 10.1037/pha0000273. Epub 2019 Mar 25.
3
Marijuana protective behavioral strategies and marijuana refusal self-efficacy: Independent and interactive effects on marijuana-related outcomes.大麻保护性行为策略和大麻拒绝自我效能:对大麻相关结果的独立和交互影响。
Psychol Addict Behav. 2019 Jun;33(4):412-419. doi: 10.1037/adb0000445. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
4
Harm reduction for cannabis: Factor analysis of a protective behavioral strategies survey.大麻的危害减少:保护性行为策略调查的因素分析
J Am Coll Health. 2018 Apr;66(3):194-201. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2018.1431894. Epub 2018 Mar 5.
5
The Protective Behavioral Strategies for Marijuana Scale: Further examination using item response theory.大麻保护性行为策略量表:使用项目反应理论的进一步检验。
Psychol Addict Behav. 2017 Aug;31(5):548-559. doi: 10.1037/adb0000271. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
6
Moderators of the Effects of Alcohol Protective Behavioral Strategies: Three Attempts of Replication and Extension.
Subst Use Misuse. 2017 Jun 7;52(7):939-949. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2016.1267222. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
7
Perceived Importance of Marijuana to the College Experience Scale (PIMCES): Initial Development and Validation.大麻对大学体验的感知重要性量表(PIMCES):初步编制与验证
J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2017 Mar;78(2):319-324. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2017.78.319.
8
Can I Use Marijuana Safely? An Examination of Distal Antecedents, Marijuana Protective Behavioral Strategies, and Marijuana Outcomes.我可以安全使用大麻吗?对远端前因、大麻保护性行为策略和大麻使用结果的考察。
J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2017 Mar;78(2):203-212. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2017.78.203.
9
Marijuana protective behavioral strategies as a moderator of the effects of risk/protective factors on marijuana-related outcomes.大麻保护性行为策略作为风险/保护因素对大麻相关结果影响的调节因素。
Addict Behav. 2017 Jun;69:14-21. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.01.007. Epub 2017 Jan 8.
10
Measuring Protective Behavioral Strategies for Marijuana Use Among Young Adults.测量年轻成年人中使用大麻的保护性行为策略。
J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2016 May;77(3):441-50. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2016.77.441.