How to Screen for Problematic Cannabis Use in Population Surveys

European Addiction Research - Tập 14 Số 4 - Trang 190-197 - 2008
Beatrice Annaheim1, Jürgen Rehm2,3,4, Gerhard Gmel5,2,1
1Swiss Institute for the Prevention of Alcohol and Drug Problems, Lausanne, Switzerland
2Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
3Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont., Canada
4Research Institute for Public Health and Addiction, Zurich,
5Alcohol Treatment Centre, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland

Tóm tắt

<i>Background/Aims:</i> Cannabis use is a growing challenge for public health, calling for adequate instruments to identify problematic consumption patterns. The Cannabis Use Disorders Identification Test (CUDIT) is a 10-item questionnaire used for screening cannabis abuse and dependency. The present study evaluated that screening instrument. <i>Methods:</i> In a representative population sample of 5,025 Swiss adolescents and young adults, 593 current cannabis users replied to the CUDIT. Internal consistency was examined by means of Cronbach’s alpha and confirmatory factor analysis. In addition, the CUDIT was compared to accepted concepts of problematic cannabis use (e.g. using cannabis and driving). ROC analyses were used to test the CUDIT’s discriminative ability and to determine an appropriate cut-off. <i>Results:</i> Two items (‘injuries’ and ‘hours being stoned’) had loadings below 0.5 on the unidimensional construct and correlated lower than 0.4 with the total CUDIT score. All concepts of problematic cannabis use were related to CUDIT scores. An ideal cut-off between six and eight points was found. <i>Conclusions:</i> Although the CUDIT seems to be a promising instrument to identify problematic cannabis use, there is a need to revise some of its items.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1080%2F0959523031000154454

10.1212%2F01.wnl.0000201279.83203.c6

10.1001%2Fjama.287.9.1123

10.1007%2Fs00213-005-0298-7

10.1136%2Fbmj.38648.617986.1F

10.1016%2Fj.forsciint.2004.11.009

10.1097%2F00131746-200505000-00004

10.1001%2Farchpsyc.61.10.1026

10.1046%2Fj.1360-0443.2003.00437.x

10.1186%2F1747-597X-1-22

10.1192%2Fbjp.188.2.148

10.1300%2FJ069v12n03_09

10.1016%2Fj.addbeh.2006.11.012

10.1016%2Fj.addbeh.2007.06.010

10.1016%2F0306-4603%2894%2900064-6

10.1111%2Fj.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x

10.1016%2FS0376-8716%2899%2900145-3

10.1177%2F10547739922158304

10.1016%2Fj.addbeh.2003.08.033

10.1037%2F0022-3514.49.6.1541

10.1016%2Fj.jpsychires.2005.07.011

10.1007%2F3-540-26573-2_24

10.1016%2FS0376-8716%2897%2900047-1