Addiction [JOURNAL]
Sun
200 papers
Profiles of youth initiating use of nicotine pouches, vapes and cigarettes: National findings from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, 2022-2023.
Erinoso O, Kasza K
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42029020 · Publisher ↗
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nicotine pouches have risen in appeal and use among United States (U.S.) youth and young adults. However, less is known about the initiation determinants of pouch use, and how they compare with those...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nicotine pouches have risen in appeal and use among United States (U.S.) youth and young adults. However, less is known about the initiation determinants of pouch use, and how they compare with those of e-cigarettes or cigarettes. This study compared the demographic, behavioral, and exposure profiles of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) who initiated nicotine pouch-use with those who initiated nicotine vaping and those who initiated smoking in a nationally representative U.S. DESIGN AND SETTINGS: We used a longitudinal study design. The study setting was the United States (US) with data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study (Waves 7 and 7.5, 2022-2023). PARTICIPANTS: AYAs aged 12-22 (n = 14 326). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcomes at follow-up were initiation of nicotine pouches (never use [2022] to ever use [2023]), vaping, and cigarette smoking. Study predictors at baseline (2022) included demographics, substance and tobacco use, mental health, and social and behavioral exposures. As a secondary objective, susceptibility to vape or smoke at baseline was examined as a predictor of pouch initiation. Separate multi-variable logistic regression models assessed factors associated with the initiation of each product. FINDINGS: The study population comprised 50.6% males, and 45.4% were between the ages 18-22 years, 15-17 years (21.2%), and 12-14 years (33.4%). In 2023, initiation rates were 2.4% for pouch use, 6.2% for vaping, and 3.2% for smoking. Current smoking at baseline was associated with initiating pouch use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.8, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.7-4.4) and initiating vaping (AOR = 5.3, 95% CI: 2.0-13.7) at follow-up. Current vaping was associated with higher odds of pouch initiation (AOR = 7.9, 95% CI: 5.1-12.4), but current pouch use was not associated with vaping initiation (AOR = 2.4, 95% CI: 0.3-16.2) at follow-up. Having important peers who use pouches (vs. none) was associated with pouch initiation (AOR = 2.2, 95% CI: 1.2-4.3), similarly for vaping but not for smoking at follow-up. Among pouch initiators (n = 335), most vaped nicotine at follow-up (37.9%), 19.7% vaped nicotine and smoked, and 5.2% smoked cigarettes and did not vape. CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette smoking appears to be associated with both nicotine pouch initiation and vaping initiation among United States adolescents and young adults. Current vaping appears to be associated with pouch initiation, but current pouch use does not appear to be associated with vaping initiation. Important peers using pouches appear to be associated with pouch initiation and vaping initiation but not cigarette smoking. Most pouch initiators in this study concurrently vaped at one-year follow-up.
Characterizing public comments via Regulations.gov in response to proposed cannabis rescheduling in the United States.
Tiyyala VM, Dubois C, Madar C … +4 more , Vandrey R, Thrul J, Dredze M, Ayers JW
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42029003 · Publisher ↗
AIMS: The United States Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act marks a significant shift in federal policy. Understan...
AIMS: The United States Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) proposed rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act marks a significant shift in federal policy. Understanding public sentiment toward this policy is critical for guiding the current cannabis rescheduling effort as well as future reforms. The objective of this study is to characterize public comments submitted to Regulations.gov regarding the DEA's cannabis rescheduling proposal and identify underlying justifications for support or opposition. DESIGN: A mixed-methods analysis was conducted. SETTING: Online public comments submitted to Regulations.gov regarding the DEA's cannabis rescheduling proposal. PARTICIPANTS: 42 913 public comments submitted between 21 May and 22 July 2024. MEASUREMENTS: Comments were analyzed for sentiment towards the proposed rescheduling (support, oppose or insufficient rescheduling) and thematic justifications using manual and automated natural language processing techniques. A two-stage annotation approach was employed: manual coding of 200 randomly sampled comments by multiple independent evaluators, followed by automated classification of all 42 913 comments using open source Large Language Model (LLM) validated against the manual annotations. FINDINGS: Using LLM-based classification validated against human annotations [88% agreement, F1 (harmonic mean of precision and recall) = 0.86], we found that among 42 913 comments, 28.85% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 28.44%-29.24%] supported rescheduling, 6.74% (95% CI = 6.50%-6.99%) opposed and 63.50% (95% CI = 63.06%-63.99%) deemed the proposal insufficient, favoring further rescheduling or complete de-scheduling of cannabis. Among the 200 manually annotated comments, therapeutic benefits (56.7%, 95% CI = 46.7%-66.7%) and economic impacts (27.8%, 95% CI = 18.9%-37.8%) were the most common justifications among supporters. Public health risks (100.0%, 95% CI = 100.0%-100.0%), addictiveness concerns (71.4%, 95% CI = 42.9%-100.0%) and concerns about underage use (57.1%, 95% CI = 14.3%-85.7%) were predominant in opposing comments. Insufficient rescheduling comments cited therapeutic benefits (37.8%, 95% CI = 28.5%-48.0%), economic impacts (28.6%, 95% CI = 19.4%-37.8%) and criminal justice reform (26.5%, 95% CI = 18.4%-35.7%) as primary justifications. CONCLUSIONS: Public sentiment on Regulations.gov supports the United States Drug Enforcement Administration's proposal for cannabis rescheduling, though the majority views the proposed Schedule III classification as inadequate and supports further rescheduling or complete de-scheduling of cannabis.
Commentary on Morris et al.: Shifting consumption from unhealthy to healthy commodities.
Araya-Ríos D
Addiction · 2026 Jun · PMID 42026851 · Full text
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
Correction to "Offering e-cigarettes for smoking cessation and reduction in people with mental illness (ESCAPE): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial".
Addiction · 2026 Jul · PMID 42023607 · Publisher ↗
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
Understanding purchasing patterns of alcoholic, alcohol-free and low-alcohol drinks: A latent profile analysis.
Rousham O, Stevely AK, Holmes J
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42023474 · Publisher ↗
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Alcohol-free and low-alcohol (no/lo) drinks (≤1.2% ABV) are increasingly popular in high-income countries. Their potential to reduce alcohol-related harm depends on who buys them, in what quantity and...
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Alcohol-free and low-alcohol (no/lo) drinks (≤1.2% ABV) are increasingly popular in high-income countries. Their potential to reduce alcohol-related harm depends on who buys them, in what quantity and their incorporation into overall drinking patterns. We aimed to (1) compare purchases containing only no/lo drinks, only alcoholic drinks or both, over time between 2018 and 2023; (2) identify subgroups with distinct purchasing patterns in 2023; and (3) describe sociodemographic differences between these subgroups. DESIGN: Latent profile analysis of cross-sectional household purchasing data. SETTING: Great Britain, 2018 and 2023. PARTICIPANTS: Nationally representative samples of 30 401 (2018) and 28 254 (2023) households. 4975 households purchasing no/lo drinks in 2023 were included in the latent profile analysis. MEASUREMENTS: Data included off-trade (i.e. shop) purchasing occasions categorised into no/lo-only, alcohol-only or no/lo alongside alcohol. Household characteristics were purchasing frequency, standard servings of no/lo drinks per adult, alcohol risk levels based on weekly units of alcohol purchased per adult (non-drinker: 0 units; low-risk: ≤14 units; increasing risk: >14- ≤ 35 units; high-risk: >35 units; 1 unit = 8 g alcohol), age, social class, region and ethnicity. FINDINGS: From 2018 to 2023, the proportion of purchasing occasions that were alcohol-only fell from 97% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 97%-97%] to 95% (95% CI = 95%-95%), while no/lo-only purchases rose from 1.4% (95% CI = 1.3%-1.4%) to 2.7% (95% CI = 2.7%-2.8%) and no/lo alongside alcohol purchases rose from 1.2% (95% CI = 1.2%-1.2%) to 1.9% (95% CI = 1.9%-2.0%). In 2023, no/lo-only purchases were smaller (median = 6.9 no/lo servings) than no/lo alongside alcohol purchases (median = 6.5 plus 24.5 alcohol units) and alcohol-only purchases (median = 24.6 units). No/lo-only purchases occurred earlier in the week, no/lo alongside alcohol purchases peaked on Fridays and Saturdays. Latent profile analysis identified three classes: no/lo triers (53%) averaged 2.1 no/lo servings per adult annually with 95% purchasing no or low-risk levels of alcohol; occasional purchasers (34%) averaged 7.5 servings with 20% purchasing alcohol at increasing or high-risk levels; dual purchasers (13%) averaged 37.8 servings with 39% purchasing alcohol at increasing or high-risk levels. Dual purchasers and occasional purchasers were more likely to be older [60% (P < 0.001) and 54% (P = 0.010) aged ≤55 years, respectively] and white [both 97% (P = 0.014 and P = 0.0074, respectively)] compared with no/lo triers (49% aged ≤55 years, 94% white). CONCLUSIONS: In Great Britain, most households that purchase no/lo drinks appear to do so infrequently and purchase alcohol at low-risk levels; however, a smaller group of older, higher-risk households purchase no/lo drinks more frequently.
Overdose prevention site closure: A reply to Day et al.
Crockford D, Colizza K, Grover M … +3 more , Leary T, Knight E, Martell D
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42017535 · Publisher ↗
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
Longitudinal associations between substance use problem severity and relative harm perceptions of e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes: Results from the United States Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (2013-2023).
Erinoso O, East K, Streck J … +2 more , Kasza K, Hyland A
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42017279 · Publisher ↗
AIMS: This study examines, among adults who smoke: (1) the association between the harm perception of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes and substance use problem (SUP) severity, (2) whether changes in SUP severity over...
AIMS: This study examines, among adults who smoke: (1) the association between the harm perception of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes and substance use problem (SUP) severity, (2) whether changes in SUP severity over time are associated with changes in harm perceptions of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes and (3) whether associations between harm perceptions and vaping initiation are moderated by SUP. DESIGN: Longitudinal study. SETTING: The study setting was the United States (US) with data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study waves 1-7 collected between 2013 and 2023. PARTICIPANTS: The study population comprised non-institutionalized US adults (18+) who smoked cigarettes in the past month. MEASUREMENTS: The primary predictor for aims 1 and 2 was SUP severity. The outcomes at follow-up were: (1) relative harm perception of vaping compared with cigarette smoking [less harmful (accurate) versus more/same harm (inaccurate)], (2) change in SUP status (from no/low at baseline wave to moderate or high severity at follow-up) and change in relative harm perceptions (from inaccurate at baseline to accurate at follow-up). For aim 3, the primary predictor was relative harm perception, the outcome was nicotine vaping initiation and SUP was examined as a moderator. FINDINGS: A higher proportion and odds of respondents with high SUP (versus no/low SUP) had accurate harm perceptions [32.1% versus 28.5%; adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.20; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-1.33]. Among individuals with no/low SUP at baseline with inaccurate perceptions, transitioning to high SUP at follow-up was associated with higher odds of developing accurate harm perceptions (aOR = 1.63; 95% CI = 1.19-2.25). Among those who smoked but had no prior history of vaping, at baseline transitioning from inaccurate to accurate harm perception at follow-up was associated with higher odds of vaping initiation (aOR = 2.08; 95% CI = 1.33-3.25). CONCLUSION: People who smoke and have high substance use problem severity appear to perceive vaping as less harmful than cigarette smoking. Notably, among those who smoke but have never vaped, transitioning from inaccurate to accurate perceptions was associated with vaping initiation.
Patient-reported outcomes for monitoring substance use treatment: A systematic review of single-item measures.
Reese TJ, Tindle HA, Bachmann J … +11 more , Wright A, Ancker JS, Audet CM, Shah MV, Steitz BD, Levin MH, Kast KA, Marcovitz D, von Horn A, Kelley AT, Bridges JFP
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42017212 · Publisher ↗
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Measurement-based care (MBC) is a structured approach using standardized, repeated assessments to monitor treatment progress and guide clinical decision-making. MBC improves outcomes for substance us...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Measurement-based care (MBC) is a structured approach using standardized, repeated assessments to monitor treatment progress and guide clinical decision-making. MBC improves outcomes for substance use treatment but can be time consuming due in part to lengthy assessment tools. Single-item, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) offer a more acceptable alternative for routine monitoring, yet their psychometric properties have not been systematically evaluated. We sought to identify constructs assessed by single-item PROMs in substance use treatment and critically appraise their validity, reliability and overall quality using standardized criteria. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review following COSMIN and PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO were searched from January 2005 to August 2025 for studies evaluating single-item PROMs in adults with substance use. We assessed psychometric properties, including content validity, test-retest reliability, construct validity, responsiveness and predictive validity using COSMIN criteria. Quality of evidence was assessed using a modified GRADE approach. RESULTS: Of 4722 records screened, 35 studies met inclusion criteria, evaluating 68 single-item PROMs across 9 clinical constructs for more than 50 000 participants. Fifteen studies achieved an overall rating of sufficient measure properties and moderate-or-above level of evidence rating across domains. Test-retest reliability ranged approximately from Intraclass Correlation Coefficient = 0.60-0.85; construct validity correlations approximately ranged r = 0.11-0.98. Predictive validity was strong for several measures, with odds ratios up to 7.3 for treatment readiness. Measures assessing craving, treatment readiness and self-efficacy demonstrated the most robust evidence and, in some cases, outperformed multi-item scales. However, over half of measures lacked empirically validated thresholds and responsiveness to change analyses, limiting clinical interpretability and treatment monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: Single-item patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are pragmatic tools for implementing measurement-based care in substance use treatment, offering strong implementation feasibility and, in some cases, predictive performance comparable to longer instruments. PROMs lacking validated thresholds or responsiveness may be best used as complementary tools, whereas those with strong evidence and thresholds can support primary monitoring.
Association between state-level kratom regulations and poison center-reported severe medical outcomes and healthcare use: A United States national analysis.
Comstock G, Gulotta AP, Rein LE … +1 more , Feldman R
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42015466 · Publisher ↗
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Kratom use in the United States (US) has increased. Kratom is not federally scheduled; regulation is heterogenous and determined at the state level. Strategies include no regulation, bans and kratom...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Kratom use in the United States (US) has increased. Kratom is not federally scheduled; regulation is heterogenous and determined at the state level. Strategies include no regulation, bans and kratom consumer protection acts (KCPA) such as age limits, product purity or labeling requirements. Public health data informing these policies remain limited. This study aimed to compare rates of poison center (PC) reported kratom exposures, including those associated with severe medical outcomes and healthcare use, across US states with differing regulatory frameworks, and to characterize national trends in kratom exposures over time. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of kratom exposures reported to the National Poison Data System from 2010 to 2023. SETTING: All 50 US states and the District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 8919 kratom-related exposures were reported to PCs during the study period, including 5452 single-substance exposures (61%). Most cases involved adult males (69%), aged ≥18 years (8133; 91%). MEASUREMENTS: States were classified by kratom regulatory status into four categories: unrestricted (no regulations), KCPA, local restrictions (KCPA in 1 or more county, but no state regulation) or banned (retail sale illegal). The primary outcome was the incidence of severe medical outcomes defined as exposures coded by America's Poison Centers criteria as major effect (life-threatening or resulting in significant residual disability) or death. Secondary outcomes included rates of exposure, hospitalization and healthcare use (defined as hospital admission or evaluation in an emergency department, urgent care or primary care). FINDINGS: Kratom exposures increased from 19 cases in 2010 to 1242 cases in 2023 [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 69.0 compared with 2010; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 39.6-120; P < 0.001]. Severe medical outcomes increased from zero cases in 2010 to 158 cases in 2023; 2012 was the first year in which a severe outcome was reported (2023 IRR = 56.9 vs 2012; 95% CI = 14.7-221; P < 0.001). Overall, 13% of kratom exposures resulted in a severe medical outcome. Compared with states where kratom was banned, statistically significantly higher rates of exposures (IRR = 2.49; 95% CI = 1.89-3.28), severe medical outcomes (IRR = 3.19; 95% CI = 1.78-5.70), healthcare use (IRR = 2.44; 95% CI = 1.66-3.60) and hospitalization (IRR = 2.45; 95% CI = 1.81-3.30, P < 0.001) occurred (all P < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were identified between other regulatory categories. CONCLUSION: Kratom exposures and severe medical outcomes reported to United States poison centers are increasing nationally, though states with bans in place have experienced less pronounced increases.
Using aggregated ethnicity categories masks inequalities in smoking prevalence in England.
Taylor E, Tattan-Birch H, Brown J … +1 more , Jackson S
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42011801 · Publisher ↗
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Smoking prevalence in England is usually reported using aggregated ethnicity categories, which may obscure important differences. This study aimed to: [1] estimate smoking prevalence in England for s...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Smoking prevalence in England is usually reported using aggregated ethnicity categories, which may obscure important differences. This study aimed to: [1] estimate smoking prevalence in England for six aggregated categories; [2] examine differences between the 18 detailed constituent groups within these categories; and [3] assess whether patterns varied by gender. DESIGN/SETTING: Data were collected between 2013 and 2025 in a series of monthly cross-sectional surveys of representative samples of the adult population in England. PARTICIPANTS: 229 979 adults aged 18 +. MEASUREMENTS: Weighted smoking prevalence was estimated for each of the 18 detailed and the six aggregated Office for National Statistics ethnicity categories. Logistic regression, adjusted for age, gender, socioeconomic status, region, survey year and survey mode examined the association between ethnicity categories and current smoking. Analyses were repeated including interactions for ethnicity by gender. FINDINGS: Smoking prevalence in England differed substantially by ethnicity. Aggregated estimates were: Asian 12.1%, Black 11.1%, Mixed or Multiple 23.9%, White 18.0%, Arab 21.8%, and Other ethnicities 18.4%; however, these aggregates obscured important variation between detailed constituent groups. Among people from Asian ethnic groups, smoking prevalence was higher for people who were Pakistani (13.5%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-1.39]), Bangladeshi (15.9%; AOR = 1.44 [1.25-1.71]), Chinese (11.1%; AOR = 1.25 [0.99-1.57]), and Other Asian (12.6%; AOR = 1.29 [1.07-1.55]) adults compared with people who were Indian (9.3%; reference). Among people from Black ethnic groups, smoking prevalence was higher for Black Caribbean (17.2%; AOR = 3.34, [2.87-3.89]) and Other Black (17.2%; AOR = 2.92 [2.32-3.69]) adults compared with Black African adults (7.3%; reference). Among people from Mixed or Multiple ethnicity groups, smoking prevalence was lower for White and Black African (20.5%; AOR = 0.64 [0.50-0.81]), White and Asian (20.7%; AOR = 0.70 [0.57-0.87]), and Other Mixed or Multiple ethnicity (23.4%; AOR = 0.86 [0.70-1.06]) adults compared with White and Black Caribbean adults (29.1%; reference). Among people from White ethnic groups, smoking prevalence was higher for White Irish (19.9%; AOR = 1.32 [1.18-1.48]), White Gypsy/Traveller (39.1%; AOR = 1.99 [1.43-2.76]), and Other White (25.2%; AOR = 1.19 [1.13-1.25]) adults compared with White British adults (17.5%; reference). There was little difference in interpretation between fully adjusted models and those adjusted for just survey year and survey mode. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking rates differ greatly among ethnic groups in England that are often aggregated together in research and national statistics. Such aggregation hides important inequalities, including very high smoking prevalence in certain communities.
Has Australia lost control of its tobacco and nicotine markets?
Borland R, Martin J, Jegasothy E … +2 more , Youdan B, Hall W
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42011071 · Publisher ↗
BACKGROUND: Australia has adopted two policies that the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends as best practice for tobacco control: it has steeply increased tobacco taxes since 2010 and only allowed access to nicoti...
BACKGROUND: Australia has adopted two policies that the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends as best practice for tobacco control: it has steeply increased tobacco taxes since 2010 and only allowed access to nicotine vapes for medical use. ARGUMENT: The rate of decline in tobacco smoking in Australia has slowed in the past decade but may have recently increased. At least half of all tobacco cigarettes and most vapes in Australia are now purchased from an illicit market that exceeds the size of the combined Australian illicit markets for cannabis, cocaine, heroin and ecstasy (MDMA). An estimated $7 billion in tobacco excise and arson attacks on tobacco retailers have prompted large increases in law enforcement funding. Based on the experience from other illicit markets, increased enforcement will at best limit sales but at likely enormous social and economic cost and, specific to nicotine, constraining access to vapes and thus potentially leading to more smoking. New Zealand, which allows vapes to be sold as consumer products under public health-oriented regulations, has shown a faster decline in the prevalence of cigarette smoking than Australia. It also has high tobacco taxes but a much smaller illicit tobacco market. CONCLUSIONS: Punitive taxes on cigarettes and restricted access to lower-risk nicotine products have diverted Australians who use nicotine into illicit markets and may also have increased cigarette smoking among young people. Australia should allow easier consumer access to less harmful alternative nicotine products to help bring the illicit tobacco and nicotine markets under better control.
Regional perspectives on substance use, substance use-related problems and policy: The case of Jordan.
Wazaify M, Suyagh M, Yasin H
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 42003428 · Publisher ↗
AIM: To situate Jordan within evolving Middle East and North Africa (MENA) substance-use dynamics and summarise national patterns of substance use, related harms, and policy responses, with attention to transit-to-consum...
AIM: To situate Jordan within evolving Middle East and North Africa (MENA) substance-use dynamics and summarise national patterns of substance use, related harms, and policy responses, with attention to transit-to-consumption transitions, surveillance limitations, and vulnerable populations. METHODS: Structured regional synthesis of government reports, peer-reviewed literature, and data from the Ministry of Health, the Anti-Narcotics Department, and international agencies. The review integrated national statistics (2019-2025) with findings from population, student, and clinical studies to outline prevalence, treatment, and regulatory contexts. RESULTS: Across MENA, conflict, displacement, demographic pressure, and shifting trafficking routes have coincided with expanding stimulant and pharmaceutical markets. In Jordan, a comparatively stable setting with a large youth population, available estimates suggest national substance use disorder [SUD] prevalence of ~0.9-1.7%, but substantially higher levels among students (7-17%), indicating concentrated risk and likely underestimation in population surveys due to stigma and underreporting. Cannabis and amphetamine-type stimulants (including Captagon) feature prominently in seizures and treatment presentations, alongside rising nonmedical use of benzodiazepines and gabapentinoids linked to regulatory gaps and pharmacy access. Tobacco use remains extremely high (66% of men), while alcohol consumption appears low in population surveys yet disproportionately represented in clinical and forensic data, highlighting hidden harm and surveillance constraints. Treatment is largely centralised in two public centres; opioid agonist therapy is limited (methadone primarily for inpatient detoxification in private settings). Harm-reduction coverage (e.g., needle-syringe programming, overdose prevention) remains low and shaped by legal, funding, and human-rights considerations. The 2022-2026 National Mental Health and Substance Use Action Plan prioritises integration into primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Jordan is progressing toward a coordinated national response to substance use and substance use-related problems, yet major gaps persist in epidemiological surveillance, harm-reduction, and gender- and youth-specific interventions. Continued investment in research and evidence-based policy evaluation remains essential for sustainable progress. Jordan's trajectory reflects broader shifts across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, where traditionally low-prevalence settings are confronting rising stimulant markets, prescription drug misuse, and constrained harm-reduction capacity.
Further expanding the addiction recovery research agenda: Institutions, populations and workforce.
Vest N
Addiction · 2026 Jul · PMID 42003403 · Publisher ↗
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
Advancing addiction science through the study of recovery trajectories.
Ivers JH
Addiction · 2026 Jul · PMID 42002297 · Full text
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
Forensic interpretation and age distribution patterns in substance-related child deaths.
Wei SY, Pan CH
Addiction · 2026 Jul · PMID 41992672 · Publisher ↗
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
Reply to Manthey et al.: Estimating the association between THC and health outcomes requires rigorous research methods and continued monitoring of cannabis markets.
Lees Thorne R, Lawn W, Freeman TP
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 41991277 · Publisher ↗
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
A manifesto for theoretical innovation.
Field M
Addiction · 2026 Jul · PMID 41988797 · Full text
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
A population-based study exploring racial and gender inequities in polysubstance-related deaths across the United States from 2004 to 2022.
Cadet K, Brinzo P, Martins SS
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 41986927 · Full text
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Recent studies have shown that Black men and women have been disproportionately impacted by overdose deaths within recent years, with their mortality rates rising sharply compared with their White cou...
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Recent studies have shown that Black men and women have been disproportionately impacted by overdose deaths within recent years, with their mortality rates rising sharply compared with their White counterparts. As the United States is in the fourth wave of the polysubstance use overdose crisis, it is unclear if polysubstance use is contributing to these disparate patterns of overdose mortality across race and gender. This study aimed to measure gender-specific racial disparities in opioid related polysubstance use drug mortality in the United States from 2004 to 2022. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In this population-level study of all deaths occurring in the United States, we obtained finalized death records of overdose fatalities identified using codes in the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) from Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Prevention's Wide-Ranging Online Database for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) Multiple Cause of Death file, from 2004 to 2022. Annual Percent Change (APC) and Annual Average Percent Change (AAPC) in age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) for White men, White women, Black men, Black women, Hispanic men and Hispanic women were determined using joinpoint regression in this cross-sectional study. MEASUREMENTS: Joinpoint regression was used to examine mortality rates for opioid-only, opioids with a stimulant, opioids with benzodiazepines, among racial/gender groups to measure temporal trends in age-adjusted overdose mortality due to polysubstance-related overdose. FINDINGS: The final analytic sample included n = 627 793 opioid-only deaths, n = 196 001 opioid-stimulant and n = 117 322 opioid-benzodiazepine overdose deaths. Opioid-involved deaths increased across all groups, with the highest absolute rate change experienced by non-Hispanic Black men (53.55 per 100 000, AAPC: 17.3%) and pronounced increases shown to occur between 2011 and 2022 (APC: 29.0%). Opioid-stimulant polysubstance use deaths had the largest increases among non-Hispanic Black men and women, with a 39.5% APC (2011-2022) for men and 36.2% APC (2012-2022) for women. Among Hispanic men, the rates accelerated 33.8% per year (2012-2022). For opioid-benzodiazepine polysubstance use deaths, non-Hispanic White men and women experienced the highest absolute rate change of 3.39 and 2.41 per 100 000, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States from 2004 to 2022, overdose deaths from polysubstance use escalated sharply across all racial and ethnic groups, with disproportionate increases across non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic individuals, particularly in opioid-stimulant and opioid-only profiles.
RETRACTION: Proportions and Correlates of High-Risk Cannabis Use in Australia-A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the 2022-2023 National Drug Strategy Household Survey.
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 41983505 · Publisher ↗
Abstract loading — click title to view on PubMed.
Proportions and correlates of high-risk cannabis use in Australia-A cross-sectional analysis of the 2022-2023 National Drug Strategy Household Survey.
Leung J, Stjepanović D, Chan GCK … +2 more , Hall WD, Dawson D
Addiction · 2026 Apr · PMID 41983434 · Publisher ↗
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cannabis use is prevalent in Australia, however, limited research has explored the levels of high-risk cannabis use within nationally representative samples. This study aimed to address this gap by ex...
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cannabis use is prevalent in Australia, however, limited research has explored the levels of high-risk cannabis use within nationally representative samples. This study aimed to address this gap by examining the proportion of individuals meeting criteria for high-risk cannabis use and identifying its correlates in a representative Australian dataset. METHODS: Observational study using data from the 2022-2023 Australian National Drug Strategy Household Survey on respondents self-reporting cannabis use every few months or more frequently (N = 1504). The outcome variable was the past 3 month cannabis use risk, assessed using the World Health Organization's ASSIST-Lite (WHO-ASSIST-Lite). A multinomial logistic regression on cannabis risk levels (moderate and high vs low) was conducted, with cannabis use patterns, psychological distress, and sociodemographic characteristics as independent variables. RESULTS: An estimated 6.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.6, 7.8) of people who consume cannabis met criteria for high-risk cannabis use. Prevalence was substantially higher among individuals who used cannabis daily (14.8% [10.2, 19.3]) compared with those who used it weekly (5.5% [2.7, 8.2]; relative risk ratio (RRR) = 5.70 [3.25, 9.98], p < 0.001). Early initiation, particularly before age 15, was also associated with greater risk of high-risk use (RRR = 2.52 [1.25, 5.08], p = 0.009), compared with initiation at age 18 or older. Respondents who reported psychological distress had an increased risk of high-risk cannabis use (RRR = 3.19 [1.66, 6.11], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A minority proportion of Australians who consume cannabis appear to meet criteria for high-risk use. Daily use, early age of initiation, and high psychological distress may be key risk factors.
About
- Frequency
- Sun
- Papers found
- 200
- RSS feed
- Subscribe