Table 3.
Longitudinal analysis | Model 4 Ever use vs never-use (ref) n = 5 400 |
Model 5 Current use vs ever- and never-use (ref) n = 5 400 |
Model 6 Regular use vs occasional use (ref) n = 2 446 |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOR (95% CI) | p | AOR (95% CI) | p | AOR (95% CI) | p | |
Cohort | ||||||
C1 (2013–14)† | 1.02 (0.79, 1.32) | 0.8855 | 1.03 (0.68, 1.55) | 0.8919 | 0.93 (0.52, 1.65) | 0.8048 |
C2 (2014–15) (ref) | ||||||
C3 (2015–16) | 0.85 (0.64, 1.12) | 0.2426 | 0.72 (0.46, 1.14) | 0.1632 | 0.64 (0.32, 1.28) | 0.2058 |
Gender | ||||||
Female (ref) | ||||||
Male | 1.07 (0.97, 1.19) | 0.1849 | 1.46 (1.29, 1.66) | <0.0001 | 1.50 (1.30, 1.71) | <0.0001 |
Grade | ||||||
9 (ref) | ||||||
10 | 2.60 (2.21, 3.07) | <0.0001 | 2.63 (1.97, 3.51) | <0.0001 | 1.19 (0.76, 1.85) | 0.4430 |
11 | 6.44 (5.39, 7.70) | <0.0001 | 6.22 (4.65, 8.31) | <0.0001 | 1.70 (1.13, 2.55) | 0.0108 |
12 | 11.19 (9.29, 13.48) | <0.0001 | 9.78 (7.27, 13.17) | <0.0001 | 1.96 (1.30, 2.96) | 0.0014 |
Cohort 1 * Grade | ||||||
9 (ref) | ||||||
10 | 1.10 (0.87, 1.39) | 0.4321 | 1.18 (0.80, 1.76) | 0.4018 | 1.38 (0.75, 2.55) | 0.2998 |
11 | 0.86 (0.67, 1.11) | 0.2499 | 0.87 (0.58, 1.31) | 0.5199 | 1.03 (0.57, 1.88) | 0.9127 |
12 | 0.88 (0.68, 1.14) | 0.3317 | 0.87 (0.58, 1.32) | 0.5196 | 1.02 (0.56, 1.86) | 0.9401 |
Cohort 3 * Grade | ||||||
9 (ref) | ||||||
10 | 1.18 (0.93, 1.51) | 0.1699 | 1.51 (0.97, 2.37) | 0.0682 | 1.68 (0.81, 3.50) | 0.1655 |
11 | 1.12 (0.86, 1.46) | 0.3926 | 1.34 (0.85, 2.11) | 0.2039 | 1.51 (0.74, 3.09) | 0.2541 |
12 | 1.20 (0.91, 1.58) | 0.1874 | 1.44 (0.91, 2.28) | 0.1188 | 1.60 (0.79, 3.26) | 0.1946 |
indicates school year at baseline when participating students were attending grade 9. Samples comprise only students participating in COMPASS in all four grades from grade 9 to 12. ‡ C2 was chosen as the reference cohort to facilitate comparison between students unexposed to the cannabis legalization process and those who were directly exposed. All models controlled for province, ethnicity, spending money and student-level clustering. AORs for main effects can be interpreted as the increased risk when all other variables held at their reference levels. AORs for interaction terms represent the multiplicative increase in risk among the corresponding non-reference categories.