Institution
RAND Corporation
Nonprofit•Santa Monica, California, United States•
About: RAND Corporation is a nonprofit organization based out in Santa Monica, California, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 9602 authors who have published 18570 publications receiving 744658 citations.
Topics: Population, Health care, Poison control, Mental health, Public health
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
University College of Medical Sciences1, Kyoto University2, Crozer-Keystone Health System3, Alexandria University4, Nagasaki University5, University of Split6, University of Newcastle7, Queen Mary University of London8, University of Perugia9, University College Cork10, Kobe University11, University of Twente12, Vrije Universiteit Brussel13, University of Hong Kong14, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology15, Ho Chi Minh City Medicine and Pharmacy University16, University of Bern17, University of Helsinki18, RAND Corporation19, University of Sydney20, University of Barcelona21, University of Vienna22, University of British Columbia23, Kerman Medical University24
325 citations
••
TL;DR: Investment in evidence-based adolescent substance use prevention programs in any additional states that may legalize recreational marijuana use is suggested, as perceived harmfulness of marijuana use decreased and marijuana use increased following legalization of recreationalarijuana use in Washington.
Abstract: Importance Historical shifts are occurring in marijuana policy. The effect of legalizing marijuana for recreational use on rates of adolescent marijuana use is a topic of considerable debate. Objective To examine the association between the legalization of recreational marijuana use in Washington and Colorado in 2012 and the subsequent perceived harmfulness and use of marijuana by adolescents. Design, Setting, and Participants We used data of 253 902 students in eighth, 10th, and 12th grades from 2010 to 2015 from Monitoring the Future, a national, annual, cross-sectional survey of students in secondary schools in the contiguous United States. Difference-in-difference estimates compared changes in perceived harmfulness of marijuana use and in past-month marijuana use in Washington and Colorado prior to recreational marijuana legalization (2010-2012) with postlegalization (2013-2015) vs the contemporaneous trends in other states that did not legalize recreational marijuana use in this period. Main Outcomes and Measures Perceived harmfulness of marijuana use (great or moderate risk to health from smoking marijuana occasionally) and marijuana use (past 30 days). Results Of the 253 902 participants, 120 590 of 245 065(49.2%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 15.6 (1.7) years. In Washington, perceived harmfulness declined 14.2% and 16.1% among eighth and 10th graders, respectively, while marijuana use increased 2.0% and 4.1% from 2010-2012 to 2013-2015. In contrast, among states that did not legalize recreational marijuana use, perceived harmfulness decreased by 4.9% and 7.2% among eighth and 10th graders, respectively, and marijuana use decreased by 1.3% and 0.9% over the same period. Difference-in-difference estimates comparing Washington vs states that did not legalize recreational drug use indicated that these differences were significant for perceived harmfulness (eighth graders: % [SD], −9.3 [3.5]; P = .01; 10th graders: % [SD], −9.0 [3.8]; P = .02) and marijuana use (eighth graders: % [SD], 5.0 [1.9]; P = .03; 10th graders: % [SD], 3.2 [1.5]; P = .007). No significant differences were found in perceived harmfulness or marijuana use among 12th graders in Washington or for any of the 3 grades in Colorado. Conclusions and Relevance Among eighth and 10th graders in Washington, perceived harmfulness of marijuana use decreased and marijuana use increased following legalization of recreational marijuana use. In contrast, Colorado did not exhibit any differential change in perceived harmfulness or past-month adolescent marijuana use following legalization. A cautious interpretation of the findings suggests investment in evidence-based adolescent substance use prevention programs in any additional states that may legalize recreational marijuana use.
324 citations
••
TL;DR: The principal conclusion of the evaluation of studies that call themselves “evidence maps” is that the implied definition of what constitutes an evidence map is a systematic search of a broad field to identify gaps in knowledge and/or future research needs that presents results in a user-friendly format, often a visual figure or graph, or a searchable database.
Abstract: The need for systematic methods for reviewing evidence is continuously increasing. Evidence mapping is one emerging method. There are no authoritative recommendations for what constitutes an evidence map or what methods should be used, and anecdotal evidence suggests heterogeneity in both. Our objectives are to identify published evidence maps and to compare and contrast the presented definitions of evidence mapping, the domains used to classify data in evidence maps, and the form the evidence map takes. We conducted a systematic review of publications that presented results with a process termed “evidence mapping” or included a figure called an “evidence map.” We identified publications from searches of ten databases through 8/21/2015, reference mining, and consulting topic experts. We abstracted the research question, the unit of analysis, the search methods and search period covered, and the country of origin. Data were narratively synthesized. Thirty-nine publications met inclusion criteria. Published evidence maps varied in their definition and the form of the evidence map. Of the 31 definitions provided, 67 % described the purpose as identification of gaps and 58 % referenced a stakeholder engagement process or user-friendly product. All evidence maps explicitly used a systematic approach to evidence synthesis. Twenty-six publications referred to a figure or table explicitly called an “evidence map,” eight referred to an online database as the evidence map, and five stated they used a mapping methodology but did not present a visual depiction of the evidence. The principal conclusion of our evaluation of studies that call themselves “evidence maps” is that the implied definition of what constitutes an evidence map is a systematic search of a broad field to identify gaps in knowledge and/or future research needs that presents results in a user-friendly format, often a visual figure or graph, or a searchable database. Foundational work is needed to better standardize the methods and products of an evidence map so that researchers and policymakers will know what to expect of this new type of evidence review. Although an a priori protocol was developed, no registration was completed; this review did not fit the PROSPERO format.
324 citations
••
TL;DR: Certain environmental features may set the stage for neighborhood social interactions, thus serving as a foundation for underlying health and well-being, and have greater than expected impact on health.
323 citations
••
TL;DR: A lower likelihood of disorders in neighborhoods with a greater presence of stress-buffering mechanisms is found, and cross-level interactions revealed that violence-exposed individuals in high crime neighborhoods are vulnerable to depressive/anxiety disorders.
323 citations
Authors
Showing all 9660 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Darien Wood | 160 | 2174 | 136596 |
Herbert A. Simon | 157 | 745 | 194597 |
Ron D. Hays | 135 | 781 | 82285 |
Paul G. Shekelle | 132 | 601 | 101639 |
John E. Ware | 121 | 327 | 134031 |
Linda Darling-Hammond | 109 | 374 | 59518 |
Robert H. Brook | 105 | 571 | 43743 |
Clifford Y. Ko | 104 | 514 | 37029 |
Lotfi A. Zadeh | 104 | 331 | 148857 |
Claudio Ronco | 102 | 1312 | 72828 |
Joseph P. Newhouse | 101 | 484 | 47711 |
Kenneth B. Wells | 100 | 484 | 47479 |
Moyses Szklo | 99 | 428 | 47487 |
Alan M. Zaslavsky | 98 | 444 | 58335 |
Graham J. Hutchings | 97 | 995 | 44270 |