Cited by 94Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchSmoking Behavior and Cessation

Brief interventions for cannabis use in emerging adults: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and evidence map

Halladay, Jillian, Scherer, Justin, MacKillop, James, Woock, Rachel, Petker, Tashia, Linton, Vanessa, Munn, Catharine·2019·Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Abstract

Purpose This systematic review summarizes and critically appraises the existing literature on brief interventions (BIs) for cannabis use among emerging adults.Methods Eligible BIs were operationalized as 1-2 sessions focused exclusively on cannabis use for samples with mean ages between 15 and 30. Outcomes related to cannabis use, other substance use, mental health, help-seeking, or functional status were included. Two independent reviewers screened a total of 3638 records, identifying 244 studies for full-text screening. In total, 32 BIs in 26 primary studies with 6318 participants were included.Results Participants were typically not seeking treatment and using cannabis at least once a month. Most interventions were motivational, single sessions, and delivered in person. Few discussed concurrent psychiatric conditions. Pooling results at 1-3 months post-intervention, BIs compared to passive control slightly reduced symptoms of cannabis use disorder (SMD -0.14 [95% CI -0.26 to -0.01]) and increased the odds of abstinence (OR 1.73 [95% CI 1.13-2.66]). Other outcome results often favored BIs but were not significant. Results of studies comparing types of BIs (k = 8) or BIs to longer interventions (k = 1) are discussed narratively. Quality assessment suggested low to very low-quality evidence.Conclusions This review indicates that BIs targeting non-treatment seeking emerging adults result in significant reductions in symptoms of cannabis use disorder and an increased likelihood of cannabis abstinence, however evidence is of low quality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.107565

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Halladay, J., Scherer, J., MacKillop, J., Woock, R., Petker, T., Linton, V., & Munn, C.
Affiliations
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research (CA)
Corresponding author
Halladay, Jillian
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-11
Volume
204
Pages
107565
ISSN
0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2973636572
Cited by
94
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
brief intervention, cannabis use, emerging adults, cannabis use disorder, cannabis abstinence, motivational interviewing, substance use, mental health, help-seeking, functional status
MeSH terms
Marijuana Abuse, Humans, Marijuana Smoking, Psychotherapy, Brief, Motivational Interviewing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review