Graham Myfanwy, Pacula Rosalie Liccardo, Pessar Seema Choksy, Ge Yimin, Kritikos Alexandra F, Hall Wayne, Hammond David
Monash Addiction Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Centre for Drug Repurposing and Medicines Research, Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Addiction. 2025 Oct;120(10):2141-2146. doi: 10.1111/add.70117. Epub 2025 Jul 1.
To identify variation in identification of medical consumers using alternative self-reported measures and assess whether differences in these rates exist across jurisdictions with different medical policy approaches using evidence from an international study on cannabis use.
Secondary analysis of wave 4 (2021) of the International Cannabis Policy Study (ICPS) cross-sectional survey.
United States, Canada and Australia.
16 951 (USA 10 472; CAN 5935; AUS 544) respondents who completed the survey and reported past year cannabis use across the three jurisdictions.
Four different medical cannabis use measures were available, and rates of each were estimated using logistic regression methods that adjusted for age, gender, education and ethnicity. Medical cannabis use measures included potentially authorized use (i.e. involving a licensed health professional recommendation, authorization or prescription), pharmaceutical use (i.e. involving a pharmaceutical-grade product), therapeutic use (i.e. to manage physical or mental health conditions) and self-identified medical cannabis use. Country-specific differences were compared and discussed in light of measure and differing cannabis policies.
In wave 4 of the ICPS, 34.0% reported any past year cannabis use, but rates of medical use differed significantly according to the specific question. Far more individuals reported therapeutic use in the past year across all countries [77.3%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 76.4%-78.2%] than any other measure of medical use. While just over one quarter (28.2%; 95% CI = 27.3%-29.2%) self-identified as a medical user, fewer reported being potentially authorized (22.8%; 95% CI = 22.0%-23.7%) or having a pharmaceutical prescription from a medical professional (12.3%; 95% CI = 11.6%-13.0%). Australians (27.2%; 95% CI = 23.0%-31.4%) and Americans (25.9%; 95% CI = 24.6%-27.2%) were more likely to report potentially authorized use than Canadians (17.3%; 95% CI = 16.1%-18.4%), but only Australians (27.4%; 95% CI = 23.6%-31.2%) reported high levels of prior use of a pharmaceutical-grade cannabinoid.
In the International Cannabis Policy Study, the proportion of respondents (adjusted for demographic factors) who reported medical use varied depending on the measures used within and between countries.
利用替代性自我报告措施确定医疗消费者识别方面的差异，并根据一项关于大麻使用的国际研究的证据，评估在采用不同医疗政策方法的司法管辖区之间这些比率是否存在差异。
对国际大麻政策研究（ICPS）横断面调查的第4波（2021年）进行二次分析。
美国、加拿大和澳大利亚。
16951名（美国10472名；加拿大5935名；澳大利亚544名）完成调查并报告了过去一年在这三个司法管辖区使用大麻情况的受访者。
有四种不同的医用大麻使用测量方法，每种方法的比率通过对年龄、性别、教育程度和种族进行调整的逻辑回归方法进行估计。医用大麻使用测量方法包括潜在授权使用（即涉及有执照的医疗专业人员的推荐、授权或处方）、药用使用（即涉及药用级产品）、治疗性使用（即用于管理身体或心理健康状况）以及自我认定的医用大麻使用。根据测量方法和不同的大麻政策对特定国家的差异进行了比较和讨论。
在ICPS的第4波中，34.0%的人报告过去一年有过大麻使用，但根据具体问题，医疗使用比率有显著差异。在所有国家中，报告过去一年进行治疗性使用的人（77.3%；95%置信区间（CI）=76.4%-78.2%）远远多于任何其他医疗使用测量方法。虽然略超过四分之一（28.2%；95%CI=27.3%-29.2%）的人自我认定为医疗使用者，但报告有潜在授权（22.8%；95%CI=22.0%-23.7%）或有医疗专业人员开具的药用处方（12.3%；95%CI=11.6%-13.0%）的人较少。澳大利亚人（27.2%；95%CI=23.0%-31.4%）和美国人（25.9%；95%CI=24.6%-27.2%）比加拿大人（17.3%；95%CI=16.1%-18.4%）更有可能报告潜在授权使用，但只有澳大利亚人（27.4%；95%CI=23.6%-31.2%）报告了高水平的药用级大麻素既往使用情况。
在国际大麻政策研究中，报告医疗使用的受访者比例（根据人口统计学因素调整后）因国家内部和国家之间使用的测量方法而异。
