对大麻使用的认知作用的认识：对神经心理学家信念的调查。,Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

对大麻使用的认知作用的认识：对神经心理学家信念的调查。
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology ( IF 1.8 ) Pub Date : 2018-08-20 , DOI: 10.1080/13803395.2018.1503644
Rayna B Hirst ₁ , Jessica Watson ₁ , Alexis S Rosen ₁ , Zoe Quittner ₁

Affiliation

简介：评估大麻的神经心理作用的研究得出了不同的结果，其中一些研究发现大麻使用者的认知缺陷（主要是在学习和记忆方面），而另一些研究则没有明显的作用。重要的是要了解临床医生如何看待经验文献中的这种差异。但是，尚无研究评估神经心理学家对大麻对认知功能影响的信念。因此，本研究试图评估患者和大麻使用因素如何影响神经心理学家对大麻认知作用的理解。方法：神经心理学家（N = 261）阅读了八个小插曲，每个小插曲描绘了大麻使用者的年龄，性别和大麻使用历史（频率，持续时间以及娱乐/药物使用）的变化。受访者对每个小插图中的大麻对九个认知领域的预期影响进行了评估。混合效应线性回归模型将认知能力的等级建模为神经心理学家，神经心理学家的训练，小插图，患者年龄，性别和使用大麻的频率/持续时间/类型的函数，并将神经心理学家和小插图视为随机效应。结果：使用时间对神经心理学家的评分影响最为明显，对每个认知领域的影响较小（0.1至0.2 SDs），但在统计学上具有显着意义（p <.001）。男性和医学用途也预测较低的认知等级。神经心理学家之间的评分差异占每个域总变异性的73％，而仅由于晕影引起的变异性可忽略不计（<1％）。结论：结果表明，神经心理学家认为，使用大麻会导致广泛但轻微的认知缺陷，这与活跃的慢性大麻使用者的荟萃分析发现一致，尤其是对于男性和使用大麻进行药物治疗的个人。有趣的是，神经心理学家预计休闲性大麻使用者的认知作用会降低。此外，使用时间（而不是频率）被认为是造成认知缺陷的主要因素。

"点击查看英文标题和摘要"

Perceptions of the cognitive effects of cannabis use: A survey of neuropsychologists' beliefs.

Introduction: Research evaluating the neuropsychological effects of cannabis has yielded mixed findings, with some studies finding cognitive deficits in cannabis users (primarily in learning and memory) and others finding no significant effects. It is important to understand how clinicians perceive this discrepancy in the empirical literature. However, no studies have assessed neuropsychologists' beliefs regarding the effects of cannabis on cognitive functioning. Thus, this study sought to evaluate how patient and cannabis-use factors influence neuropsychologists' perceptions of cannabis's cognitive effects. Method: Neuropsychologists (N = 261) read eight vignettes, each depicting cannabis users varying in age, gender, and cannabis-use history (frequency, duration, and recreational/medicinal use). Respondents rated the anticipated effects of cannabis in each vignette on nine cognitive domains. Mixed effects linear regression modeled the ratings of cognitive abilities as a function of neuropsychologist, neuropsychologists' training, vignette, patient age, gender, and frequency/duration/type of cannabis use, and treated neuropsychologist and vignette as random effects. Results: Duration of use had the most notable effect on neuropsychologists' ratings, with a small (0.1 to 0.2 SDs) yet statistically significant (p < .001) negative effect on each cognitive domain. Male gender and medicinal use also predicted lower cognitive ratings. Differences in ratings between neuropsychologists accounted for 73% of the total variability in each domain, whereas variability due to vignette alone was negligible (<1%). Conclusions: Results suggest that neuropsychologists believe that cannabis use results in broad but mild cognitive deficits, consistent with meta-analytic findings of active chronic cannabis users, particularly for males and for individuals using cannabis for medicinal purposes. Interestingly, neuropsychologists expected fewer cognitive effects in recreational cannabis users. Further, duration of use (rather than frequency) was believed to be the primary factor contributing to cognitive deficits.

更新日期：2019-11-01

点击分享查看原文

点击收藏

阅读更多本刊新发论文本刊介绍/投稿指南