Cited by 56Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchEmergency and Acute Care StudiesPoisoning and overdose treatments

Clearing the air: A study of cannabis-related presentations to urban Alberta emergency departments following legalization

Open access
Yeung, Matthew E. M., Weaver, Colin G., Janz, Kevin, Haines-Saah, Rebecca, Lang, Eddy·2020·CJEM

Abstract

Objectives: Non-medical cannabis recently became legal for adults in Canada. Legalization provides opportunity to investigate the public health effects of national cannabis legalization on presentations to emergency departments (EDs). Our study aimed to explore association between cannabis-related ED presentations, poison control and telemedicine calls, and cannabis legalization. Methods: Data were collected from the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System from October 1, 2013, to July 31, 2019, for 14 urban Alberta EDs, from Alberta poison control, and from HealthLink, a public telehealth service covering all of Alberta. Visitation data were obtained to compare pre- and post-legalization periods. An interrupted time-series analysis accounting for existing trends was completed, in addition to the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and relative risk calculation (to evaluate changes in co-diagnoses). Results: Although only 3 of every 1,000 ED visits within the time period were attributed to cannabis, the number of cannabis-related ED presentations increased post-legalization by 3.1 (range -11.5 to 12.6) visits per ED per month (IRR 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]; 1.39, 1.51; absolute level change: 43.5 visits per month, 95% CI; 26.5, 60.4). Cannabis-related calls to poison control also increased (IRR 1.87, 95% CI; 1.55, 2.37; absolute level change: 4.0 calls per month, 95% CI; 0.1, 7.9). Lastly, we observed increases in cannabis-related hyperemesis, unintentional ingestion, and individuals leaving the ED pre-treatment. We also observed a decrease in co-ingestant use. Conclusion: Overall, Canadian cannabis legalization was associated with small increases in urban Alberta cannabis-related ED visits and calls to a poison control centre.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cem.2020.384

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • There is emerging evidence of the potential of RCL to help decrease CUD and multiple substance hospital admissions.

    “There is emerging evidence of the potential of RCL to help decrease CUD and multiple substance hospital admissions74,82”

    From The Impact of Recreational Cannabis Legalization on Cannabis Use and Associated Outcomes: A Systematic Review (2023) · cites this paper as [74]

    The “Presentation pattern and co-ingestant use analysis” section reports lower proportions of co-ingestant use and hospital admission among cannabis-related ED presentations after legalization. It does not report a decrease in cannabis use disorder (CUD), and these proportional changes do not establish a decrease in the number of multiple-substance hospital admissions. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • There was a significant increase in telephone calls to poison control hotlines regarding cannabis after legalization.

    “There was also a significant increase in telephone calls to poison control hotlines regarding cannabis (IRR = 1.87).”
  • After legalization, there were small but statistically significant increases in cannabis-related ED visits in Calgary and Edmonton.

    “After legalization, there were small but statistically significant increases in cannabis‐related ED visits [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.45].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [7]7. Galli JA, Sawaya RA, Friedenberg FK. Cannabinoid hyper- emesis syndrome. Curr Drug Abuse Rev 2011;4(4):241-9.
  2. [17]17. Public Health Ontario. Indicators for monitoring cannabis- related health outcomes. Toronto: Public Health Ontario; 2019. Available at: https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/ media/documents/rapid-review-cannabis-indicators.pdf?la= en (accessed March 25, 2020).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yeung, M. E. M., Weaver, C. G., Janz, K., Haines-Saah, R., & Lang, E.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Yeung, Matthew E. M.
Venue
CJEM
Published
2020-06-19
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
776-783
ISSN
  • 1481-8035 (ISSN-L)
  • 1481-8043
OpenAlex
W3036260144
Cited by
56
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
5.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Alberta Health Services
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Poisoning and overdose treatments
Keywords
cannabis legalization, emergency department presentation
MeSH terms
Adult, Alberta, Cannabis, Emergency Service, Hospital, Humans, Legislation, Drug, Incidence

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