@article{ref1,
title="Commentary on Gunadi et al.: Opportunities to design more policy-relevant evaluations of non-medical cannabis legalization",
journal="Addiction",
year="2022",
author="Trangenstein, Pamela J. and Jernigan, David H.",
volume="ePub",
number="ePub",
pages="ePub-ePub",
abstract="Amid sweeping momentum world-wide to repeal cannabis bans, evaluations of non-medical cannabis laws have proliferated. However, cross-sectional designs [1] or inappropriate design choices [2] limit many of these studies. The article by Gunadi, Zhu & Shi demonstrates the potential for using causal inference methods in longitudinal settings to overcome these methodological hurdles [3]. Their work underscores the need to refine research conceptualization and methods to more clearly inform policy discussions.   Taxonomies that classify jurisdictions according to the restrictiveness of their cannabis policy environments [4] may allow researchers to identify more appropriate control and treatment locations. Currently, evaluations of non-medical cannabis legalization are too heterogeneous to meta-analyze [5]. Some of this heterogeneity may arise from the profoundly different ways jurisdictions that fall under the same stage of cannabis legalization (i.e. illegal, decriminalized, medical cannabis or non-medical cannabis) regulate cannabis sale and consumption [6-9]. When this is the case, grouping these jurisdictions together to form treatment and control conditions will probably reduce researchers' odds of detecting associations.   Increasing attention to legalization time-lines presents another opportunity to strengthen the links between non-medical cannabis policy research and policymaking processes. Building a non-medical cannabis market is a lengthy process in which different aspects emerge and stabilize at different time...<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0965-2140",
doi="10.1111/add.15984",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/add.15984"
}