THE CANADIAN CANNABIS SURVEY 2018
METHODOLOGICAL REPORT

Prepared for Health Canada

Supplier Name: Advanis Inc.
Contract Number:HT372-182371 001 CY
Contract Value: $221, 000.00
Award Rate: 2018-05-01
Delivery Date: 27 August, 2018

Registration Number: POR #006-18
For more information on this report, please contact Health Canada at:
HC.cpab.por-rop.dgcap.SC@canada.ca

Ce rapport est aussi disponbile en Francais

Prepared for Health Canada
Supplier name: Advanis Inc.
August 2018

This public opinion research report presents the results of an online survey conducted by Advanis Inc. on behalf of Health Canada. The research was conducted with 12,958 Canadians between May 15th and July 9th, 2018.

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Health Canada. For more information on this report, please contact Health Canada at: HC.cpab.por-rop.dgcap.SC@canada.ca

Catalogue number: H14-263/2018E-PDF

International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-27303-7

Related publications (registration number: POR 006-18): Catalogue number H14-263/2018F-PDF (Final report, French) ISBN 978-0-660-27304-4

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Health, 2018

Table of Contents

 

1.0 Background and Objectives

1.1 Background

Use of marijuana is common in Canada. In 2015, Health Canada’s Canadian Tabacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey (CTADS) found that 12.3% of respondents 15 years of age and older reported using marijuana in the past year. Past-year use was more common among males (15%) compared to females (10%). Canadians 15 to 24 years old were significantly more likely to use cannabis in past 12 months than those 25 years of age or older. Use is also common in students, with almost one in five students in grades 7 to 12 reporting past year use in the 2016-2017 Canadian Student Tabacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey (CSTADS). International data for cannabis from 2013 showed the United States as the leader in lifetime prevalence rates at 43.7%Footnote 1, while Canada followed closely behind at 41.2%Footnote 2, and then the United Kingdom at 29.9%Footnote 3.

In the 2015 Speech from the Throne, the Government of Canada committed to legalizing, regulating, and restricting access to marijuana. In 2016, the Government’s Task Force on Marijuana Legalization and Regulation issued a discussion paper entitled “Toward the legalization, regulation and restriction of access to marijuana” that initiated wider consultations and dialogue regarding its intention in this area. In June 2017, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act and in 2018 this Bill was passed. Non-medical cannabis legalization and regulation is scheduled to go into force October 17th, 2018.

The legalization and regulation of non-medical cannabis in Canada has also prompted a policy and scientific requirement to collect new comprehensive data on the subject of cannabis use and non-use, including indicators in the areas of health, public safety, and markets. New research on cannabis use is helping the government better evaluate the possible impacts associated with legalization, regulation, and restriction. In May and June 2016, Health Canada conducted the Baseline Survey on Awareness, Knowledge and Behavior Associated with Recreational Use of Marijuana (administered by Ekos Research Associates). This study examined the knowedge, perceived acceptability and health risks, pattern of recreational use, and information-seeking behaviors. This study found that 58% of respondents reported cannabis use in the past and that 22% reported use in the past 12 months. Among those who did not report use in the past 12 months, 85% felt they were unlikely to use cannabis once it becomes legal.

In 2017, the first cycle of the Canadian Cannabis Survey (CCS) was completed and collected data from 9,215 people 16 years of age and older. All respondents were asked questions regarding the social acceptability of recreational cannabis use, observations of cannabis use in public, cannabis use by family and friends, use of cannabis in the home and for opinions on cannabis effects, cannabis impairment and driving, and whether cannabis can be habit forming. Respondents that reported using cannabis in the past 12 months were asked detailed questions relating to the frequency, quantity, routes of administration, and forms of cannabis used. They were also asked about the cost of purchasing cannabis and where they typically source the cannabis they use. In addition, they were asked about driving after use, harms and benefits of cannabis use and whether they use cannabis for medical purposes.

1.2 Objectives of the survey

The 2018 Canadian Cannabis Survey aimed to gather additional data. It wanted to examine in more depth patterns of use, such as the quantities used and medical use; the cannabis market, such as sources and pricing; and issues of public safety, such as impaired driving.

In conducting this research, Health Canada’s objective was to collect information on the following:

1.3 Total expenditure

The total cost of this research was $221,000.00 excluding HST.

2.0 Sampling

2.1 The general approach

The approach used was a two-step recruitment process where respondents were first recruited by telephone (both land-line and mobile) using a short battery of screener questions approved by Health Canada. Respondents who completed the screener questions and qualified for the survey were then sent a link to the online survey, either by email or SMS depending on their preference. Respondents were recruited from lists of random telephone numbers (RDD) that Advanis verified were in service. The distribution of phone numbers was approximately 83 percent mobile phones and 17 percent landline numbers.

The rationale for using a higher volume of cell phone than landline numbers came from the requirement of oversampling youth aged 16 to 24 years old. From previous experience, we know that this group is very hard to reach by conventional landline for two majors reasons; first, they use their parents’ landline and we have difficulty reaching them; second, if they have left their parent’s house, they most likely use a cell phone rather than a landline.

In total, we called 201,235 phone numbers, and 22,356 people agreed to participate in the survey. Of these calls, 18 percent were conducted in French and 82 percent were conducted in English. The response rate calculation is presented in Appendix A.

During the computer assisted telephone interviews (CATI) recruit, Advanis requested permission to send the survey link to respondent’s mobile phones via a Short Message Service (SMS). The advantage of SMS survey invitations is that, unlike email invitations, it avoids issues with incorrect email addresses and spam filtering. If the recruited respondent did not have a smartphone or preferred email, survey links were sent via email. Of the respondents who completed the CATI screener, 80 percent were recruited via SMS, and 20 percent were recruited by email. Of those recruited to the online survey by SMS, 56.6% completed the online survey. Among those sent an email invitation, the completion rate of the online survey was 65.6% percent.

To increase the response rate, inbound calling was allowed and directed to interviewers trained on the survey. If the potential respondent called from the phone that was initially dialled by someone in the call centre, the calling record was automatically displayed to an interviewer.

Email reminders were sent 3 days and 6 days after the initial invitation. Once reminders had been sent, Advanis also conducted telephone reminders 3 days after the last reminder to confirm the invite had been received, and corrected email addresses if necessary. During these calls (only made once), voicemail messages were left reminding the respondents that the survey was still open and a final invite was triggered automatically.

The average survey length for the questionnaire for those that used cannabis in the past 12 months was 22 minutes, and it was just under 10 minutes on average for those that did not use cannabis in the past 12 months. We need to keep in mind that, during an online survey, the time elapsed doesn’t necessarily align perfectly with survey duration since respondents may not always complete the survey all at once. As for the duration of the recruitment interviews, the average length was 3 minutes.

The pretest and field dates

The English pretest was conducted on May 15th, 2018. During this pretest, we recruited 184 people by phone, which then translated into 103 completed online surveys. The French pretest was conducted on May 17th with 186 phone interviews completed by the end of the day. The validation of the data was completed the morning of May 18th. This validation included respondents that had used cannabis in the past 12 months, as well as those that had not, to ensure that all questions were tested. No changes were made to the survey following the pretest. The data collection period was from May 15th to July 9th, 2018.

2.3 Quality control

2.3.1 – Quality control in survey programming

Advanis utilizes technology to maximize quality control in survey programming. Having developed a proprietary survey engine tool, Advanis professionals are able to design and program a survey in a browser-based environment, eliminating the need to hand it off to a programmer who is less familiar with the survey subject matter. Below are the steps followed to ensure the quality of the surveys.

2.3.2 CATI Methodology and quality control

The CATI recruit script was programmed on Advanis’ proprietary CATI platform with no foreseen challenges. Advanis was able to leverage its experience for the survey programming and the reminder process to achieve high quality standards.

To ensure high interview quality, our interviewers are trained to use various interviewing techniques. As well as maintaining a professional attitude, our interviewers must also be convincing, read word-for-word, take notes, probe deeper on semi-open and open questions, systematically confirm the information given and listen to the respondent.

2.3.3 – Web methodology and quality control

All Advanis Web surveys are hosted internally by Advanis, and we employ a rigorous and stringent set of data collection control mechanisms to ensure the highest quality for the data collected, including:

2.3.4 Quality control in data handling and reporting

For all of the data collected, Advanis develops rules to check the validity of the data. These rules include items such as:

Advanis staff have used the SPSS Statistics Software for 20 years and are very proficient users of the software. All data cleaning performed on a project are outlined in syntax files with intermediate data files saved throughout the process. This ensures that the original raw data file is never overwritten, and that if an error is discovered in our code, we can quickly and easily rerun the syntax to produce a new data file. Individuals developing code incorporate internal checks in their code (e.g., crosstabs) to ensure the syntax had the desired effect. In addition, all syntax is reviewed by another team member or technical specialist for accuracy.

2.4 Sampling plan and data collection

The target audience of this project is Canadians who are 16 years and older. This study includes both those that had used cannabis and those that had not. A “person that uses cannabis” is someone who has used cannabis in the last 12 months. The expected incidence of cannabis use in the past 12 months in the general population is 12%, according to Health Canada data.

Key sub-population variables that required quotas were:

The sample consisted of a core sample of 10,000 Canadians aged 16 and older (those that use cannabis and those that do not). In the end, we gathered 12,958 responses in order to reach all of our quotas. Table 1 presents the results for the entire data collection versus the quota for the base sample.

Table 1: The Targets and Results
Region Minimum Sample Size Target Sample Size Results
NL 400 400 507
PEI 400 400 485
NS 400 400 476
NB 400 400 455
QC 1,900 1,900 2,622
ON 2,800 2,900 3,876
MB 400 400 608
SK 400 400 468
AB 1,100 1,200 1,614
BC 1,300 1,400 1,631
Territories 180 200 216
Total ---   12,958
Age      
16 to 19 years 500 800 503
20 to 24 years 800 1,000 879
25 years and older 7,000 8,200 11,576
Sex      
Male 3,800 5,000 6,160
Female 3,800 5,000 6,662
Missing --- --- 136

3.0 Weighting

3.1 The weighting approach

Overall, 12,958 web interviews were conducted during data collection, 2,374 in French and 10,584 in English. The weighting of the final file was based on three variables: region, age, and sex at birth. For the 136 people who were missing a response for sex at birth, gender was used in place of sex at birth for 130 cases, and a random sex was attributed to the other 6 cases. This group will be analyzed separately for analysis purposes. The population sizes are based on the latest Statistics Canada census results published, the 2016 Census. Since the value for the 16 to 19 age category wasn’t available (only 15 to 19 is provided), we reduced the 15 to 19 year category by 1/5 of the size to reflect the best estimate of the number of 16 to 19 year olds. See section 4.2 for guidelines on the limitation of analysis with the weights.

Table 3: The weights
KEY Prov Sex Age weights
1M1 AB Male 16 to 19 2825.6
1M2 AB Male 20 to 24 3116.04651
1M3 AB Male 25 to 34 2133.32237
1M4 AB Male 35 to 44 1609.78261
1M5 AB Male 45 to 54 1986.10714
1M6 AB Male 55+ 2121.49123
1F1 AB Female 16 to 19 2660.8
1F2 AB Female 3106.5625 2367.40741
1F3 AB Female 25 to 34 1796.88202
1F4 AB Female 35 to 44 1660.08571
1F5 AB Female 45 to 54 1938.59155
1F6 AB Female 55+ 2089.85887
2M1 BC Male 16 to 19 3224.24242
2M2 BC Male 20 to 24 2733.61111
2M3 BC Male 25 to 34 2620.68376
2M4 BC Male 35 to 44 1759.25926
2M5 BC Male 45 to 54 2182.6
2M6 BC Male 55+ 2555.5477
2F1 BC Female 16 to 19 4581.09091
2F2 BC Female 20 to 24 3332.02381
2F3 BC Female 25 to 34 2720.4386
2F4 BC Female 35 to 44 1818.20359
2F5 BC Female 45 to 54 2143.25153
2F6 BC Female 55+ 2483.93519
3M1 MB Male 16 to 19 3404.4
3M2 MB Male 20 to 24 1482.16667
3M3 MB Male 25 to 34 1429.66667
3M4 MB Male 35 to 44 1470.74074
3M5 MB Male 45 to 54 1468.50877
3M6 MB Male 55+ 1914.10112
3F1 MB Female 16 to 19 3191.2
3F2 MB Female 20 to 24 2643.4375
3F3 MB Female 25 to 34 1345.3125
3F4 MB 273 35 to 44 1191.32353
3F5 MB Female 45 to 54 1378.79032
3F6 MB Female 55+ 2198.69318
4M1 NB Male 16 to 19 1858.22222
4M2 NB Male 20 to 24 1418.66667
4M3 NB Male 25 to 34 1078.10811
4M4 NB Male 35 to 44 1025.22727
4M5 NB Male 45 to 54 1374.75
4M6 NB Male 55+ 2187.58621
4F1 NB Female 16 to 19 1576
4F2 NB Female 20 to 24 1260.3125
4F3 NB Female 25 to 34 908.222222
4F4 NB Female 35 to 44 974.591837
4F5 NB Female 45 to 54 856.19403
4F6 NB Female 55+ 2180.15385
5M1 NL Male 16 to 19 1398
5M2 NL Male 20 to 24 994.285714
5M3 NL Male 25 to 34 744.210526
5M4 NL Male 35 to 44 680.3260875
5M5 NL Male 45 to 54 744.811321
5M6 NL Male 55+ 1168.15789
5F1 NL Female 16 to 19 1180
5F2 NL Female 20 to 24 626.590909
5F3 NL Female 25 to 34 611.875
5F4 NL Female 35 to 44 628.703704
5F5 NL Female 45 to 54 605.942029
5F6 NL Female 55+ 1390.85714
6M1 NS Male 16 to 19 1749.33333
6M2 NS Male 20 to 24 1876.33333
6M3 NS Male 25 to 34 1622.5
6M4 NS Male 35 to 44 1204.88372
6M5 NS Male 45 to 54 2211.16667
6M6 NS Male 55+ 1812.58824
5F6 NL Female 55+ 1390.85714
6F1 NS Female 16 to 19 4002.4
6F2 NS Female 20 to 24 1400.5
6F3 NS Female 25 to 34 1338.375
6F4 NS Female 35 to 44 970.338983
6F5 NS Female 45 to 54 1148.95161
6F6 NS Female 55+ 2413.83562
7M1 ON Male 16 to 19 3876.51163
7M2 ON Male 20 to 24 3692.05645
7M3 ON Male 25 to 34 2621.23853
7M4 ON Male 35 to 44 2488.98485
7M5 ON Male 45 to 54 2788.14655
7M6 ON Male 55+ 3037.3764
7F1 ON Female 16 to 19 5265.86667
7F2 ON Female 20 to 24 3668.65546
7F3 ON Female 25 to 34 2484.4507
7F4 ON Female 35 to 44 2126.17857
7F5 ON Female 45 to 54 2430.98575
7F6 ON Female 55+ 3312.3217
8M1 PEI Male 16 to 19 394.222222
8M2 PEI Male 20 to 24 209.047619
8M3 PEI Male 25 to 34 200.945946
8M4 PEI Male 35 to 44 172.765957
8M5 PEI Male 45 to 54 228.977273
8M6 PEI Male 55+ 369.444444
8F1 PEI Female 16 to 19 306.545455
8F2 PEI Female 20 to 24 302.142857
8F3 PEI Female 25 to 34 173.26087
8F4 PEI Female 35 to 44 138.75
8F5 PEI Female 45 to 54 228.404255
8F6 PEI Female 55+ 322.621951
9M1 QC Male 16 to 19 3186.47273
9M2 QC Male 20 to 24 2716.12903
9M3 QC Male 25 to 34 1925.45802
9M4 QC Male 35 to 44 1874.8049
9M5 QC Male 45 to 54 2324.40816
9M6 QC Male 55+ 3727.55917
9F1 QC Female 16 to 19 2857.69492
9F2 QC Female 20 to 24 1918.60465
9F3 QC Female 25 to 34 1993.89764
9F4 QC Female 35 to 44 1732.36066
9F5 QC Female 45 to 54 2372.45833
9F6 QC Female 55+ 3984.51389
10M1 SK Male 16 to 19 4624
10M2 SK Male 20 to 24 2254.375
10M3 SK Male 25 to 34 1811.62791
10M4 SK Male 35 to 44 1488.15217
10M5 SK Male 45 to 54 1353.13725
10M6 SK Male 55+ 1913.58974
10F1 SK Female 16 to 19 1884.57143
10F2 SK Female 20 to 24 3776.11111
10F3 SK Female 25 to 34 2204.28571
10F4 SK Female 35 to 44 1389.4898
10F5 SK Female 45 to 54 1994.71429
10F6 SK Female 55+ 1921.80233
11M1 Territories Male 16 to 19 1602
11M2 Territories Male 20 to 24 600
11M3 Territories Male 25 to 34 377.916667
11M4 Territories Male 35 to 44 304.2
11M5 Territories Male 45 to 54 514.666667
11M6 Territories Male 55+ 283.25
11F1 Territories Female 16 to 19 1009.33333
11F2 Territories Female 20 to 24 645
11F3 Territories Female 25 to 34 355
11F4 Territories Female 35 to 44 362.5
11F5 Territories Female 45 to 54 448.235294
11F6 Territories Female 55+ 356.896552

3.2 The design effect calculation

Introducing weighting generates a design effect that can be attributed to weight variation. This effect increases the sampling error in comparison to the random sampling without weighting.

The following table presents the design effect (the effect of the sampling plan on the statistical power of the sample) for each region separately as well as for the entire sample. Also, this table shows the size of an “efficient” sample, which corresponds to the size of the random sample which would have the same precision degree. For the total sample, the variation of the sampling fractions comes from the fact that the number of interviews are done in each region regardless of their size.

3.3 Design effect and efficient size of the sample

Table 4: Design effect for sample
Province Mean of weights N Standard deviation Design effect Usable sample size Margin of error
Canada 2230.7834 12958 894.1736 1.16066781 11164 0.9 %
Alberta 2007.4343 1614 318.9723 1.02524778 1574 2.5 %
British Columbia 2394.1074 1631 454.6045 1.03605622 1574 2.5 %
Manitoba 1674.4342 608 471.3186 1.07923061 563 4.1 %
New Brunswick 1381.3165 455 529.9408 1.14718659 397 4.9 %
Newfoundland and Labrador 867.5128 507 296.8832 1.11711688 454 4.6 %
Nova Scotia 1637.6555 476 541.4629 1.10931817 429 4.7 %
Ontario 2858.0547 3876 550.4541 1.03709379 3737 1.6 %
Prince Edward Island 244.2990 485 79.8361 1.10679615 438 4.7 %
Quebec 2572.5229 2622 834.0510 1.10511549 2373 2.0 %
Saskatchewan 1857.1218 468 500.7959 1.07271781 436 4.7 %
Territories (NT, NU, YT) 394.4537 216 164.2118 1.17330731 184 7.2 %
 

4.0 Data Cleaning and Guidelines for Analysis and Release

4.1 Data cleaning and coding

After the data collection was completed data cleaning was performed to ensure a high quality of results. Since it was requested right before launch by Health Canada to give respondents the option to refuse to answer any question, questions were made not required instead of adding an opt-out option to the survey itself. This was the simplest course of action given both time and translation constraints. During data cleaning respondents who were asked the question and refused to provide an answer were recoded to “Prefer not to say”.

A recode was done for 5 cases where the validation in the pretest did not allow a response of 0 in questions q39b and m19b so responses of 1 were given to advance past the question.

Q29 was also recoded in the data as level 1 (I grew my own), if Q28=1 (I grew all the cannabis I used myself). This question (Q29) was skipped in the survey for these cases as it did not make sense to ask it.

The next step was to perform any necessary data coding. A detailed scale was used to describe quantities across the survey. Once data collection was completed, these scales were transformed into metric questions for ease of analysis. The metric question type simplifies the analysis by easily providing measures of mean, median, etc. For this recoding of scales into a metric value, the recoding was done using the same logic for recoding as the 2017 Canadian Cannabis survey, for consistency and comparability of results. The scale used was the same as in the previous phase of the project.

A review of open-ended responses was also performed as part of the data cleaning. Any “other” responses were recoded into existing categories when appropriate. A coding guide was created for answers that had sufficient numbers of mentions to be added in as a new response level. Specific verbatim themes that did not have a sufficient number of mentions were left in the “other” category.

4.2 Guidelines for the analysis and the use of weights

When doing an analysis, it is important to align the analysis plan with the weighting scheme. The weights adjust the data to better reflect the population based on parameters that have been chosen to maximize the level of detail without creating distortions due to extreme weights (an extreme weight will occur when a population group is represented by a proportionally smaller subset of respondents compared to other population groups, thus introducing an important risk of bias due to their specific profile).

For this study, the basic sociodemographic information that should be used in analysis of results are:

Using age groupings other than the ones described above for these sociodemographic categories could potentially produce distorted data. As these results would be inaccurate based on how the weights were calculated, we strongly advise not to report any results that are not aligned with these specified categories.

In the provided data file, the variable to be used to weight the data is called “weight”. In this case, it was decided to project to the total population, around 28 million Canadian residents.

Any results with an unweighted base of 30 respondents or fewer should not be reported on, due to statistical robustness. Results with more than 30 but fewer than 50 respondents should be interpreted with caution, and considered as directional guidelines. Results based on 50 or more respondents have not been noted in any way. The reason for suppressing results with small base sizes is due to the increased coefficient of variation and hence larger confidence intervals around results with smaller bases.

For all estimates the following guidelines for data suppression related to coefficients of variation (CV) should be used when reporting results:
CV range Estimate Stability
*CV= (standard error / coefficient) * 100 where the coefficient is either the regression coefficient or the proportion estimate.
0 – 16.5 Acceptable, the estimate stable
16.6 – 33.3 Marginal, the estimate has moderate sampling variability and should be interpreted with caution
>33.3 Unacceptable , the estimate is unstable and should be suppressed
 

Appendices

Appendix A: Response Rate Calculation

  TOTAL %
GENERATED 201234 100.0%
% REFUSALFootnote 7 46.5%
% COMPLETEDFootnote 8 12.5%
ELIGIBILITY RATE (E.R.)Footnote 9 95.5%
MRIA RESPONSE RATEFootnote 10 12.9%
USED 201234 100.0%
Not in service 12657 6.35%
Not residential 2246 1.1%
Line problem 877 0.4%
Fax 596 0.3%
Wrong number 141 0.1%
NOT VALIDFootnote 4 16517 8.2%
VALID 184717 91.8%
Not eligible 1224 0.7%
Language barrier 978 0.5%
Age – Illness 171 0.1%
Other 68 0.0%
NOT SAMPLEFootnote 5 2441 1.2%
SAMPLEFootnote 6 179100 89.0%
Household refusal 60321 33.7%
Multiple household refusal 10 0.0%
Respondent refusal 21559 12.0%
Multiple respondent refusal 41 0.0%
FINAL refusal 1408 0.8%
Prolonged absence 213 0.1%
Incomplete 22 0.0%
No answer 67003 37.4%
Appointments 6167 3.4%
Completed interviews 22356 13.0%

Appendix B: Political neutrality requirement

Political neutrality certification

I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Advanis that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research.

Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.

Signed:

Nicolas Toutant, Vice-President, Research and Evaluation

Appendix C: Questionnaire

Intro

Health Canada is conducting this research survey on knowledge about and use of cannabis. Advanis has been hired to administer the survey. Si vous préférez répondre au sondage en français, veuillez cliquer sur FRANÇAIS.

The survey takes between 5 and 20 minutes to complete and is voluntary and completely confidential. Your answers will remain anonymous.

If you wish to verify the authenticity of this survey please email: ODSS.BSSD@hc-sc.gc.ca.

The survey automatically moves to the next question when possible, however in some cases you need to press the right arrow button at the bottom of the screen to move to the next question. This button will not appear until you have answered the question.

To change previous answers you can press the left arrow button at the bottom of the screen. Some questions provide further information if you press the following symbol:

If you need to stop the survey at any point you can return at a later time and the survey will continue where you left off.

For help you can contact 888-944-9212.

© 2018 Advanis Privacy Policy

MainIntro

In this survey when we use the term cannabis, this includes marijuana (e.g., weed, pot), hashish, hash oil or any other products made from the cannabis plant but not synthetic cannabinoids.

When we ask about use, this includes using cannabis in its dry form or when mixed or processed into another product such as an edible, a concentrate, including hashish, a liquid, or other product for non-medical purposes.

By non-medical purposes we mean recreational (e.g., for enjoyment, pleasure, amusement), socially, for spiritual, lifestyle and other similar non-medical uses.

Section NonMedical

Page UsageAmounts_NonMed

Show if Q18 Is NonMedical User

Page Source_NonMed

Show if Q18 Is NonMedical User

  1. Q38    Show if Q20 Is NonMedical User Past 30 Days
  2. In the past 30 days, how often have you bought or received cannabis in the following form for non-medical purposes?
  3. Dried flower/leaf  (Show if Q37 1 Obtained Other past 30 days)
  4. Hashish/kief  (Show if Q37 2 Obtained Other past 30 days)
  5. Liquid concentrate (e.g., hash oil, butane honey oil, etc.)  (Show if Q37 3 Obtained Other past 30 days)
  6. Cannabis oil cartridges or disposable vape pens  (Show if Q37 4 Obtained Other past 30 days)
  7. Solid concentrate (e.g., shatter, budder, etc.)  (Show if Q37 5 Obtained Other past 30 days)
  8. Edibles (e.g., prepared food products)  (Show if Q37 6 Obtained Other past 30 days)
  9. Liquid (e.g., cola/tea)  (Show if Q37 7 Obtained Other past 30 days)
  10. Other: <>  (Show if Q37 8 Obtained Other past 30 days)

Page 30dayUsage_NonMed

Show if Q18 Is NonMedical User

Page UsageLocation_NonMed

Show if Q18 Is NonMedical User

Page Driving_NonMed

Show if Q18 Is NonMedical User

Page LifeImpact_NonMed

Show if Q18 Is NonMedical User

Page 3Mth_Usage_NonMed

Show if Q56 Used NonMedical past 3 months

Page MultipleUse_NonMed

Show if Q12 Cannabis used more than once in lifetime

Page MultipleUse_NonMed

Show if Q12 Cannabis used more than once in lifetime

Page Demo2

Section MedicalUse

Show if Q17 Used cannabis for medical purposes

Page IntroMed

Section MedSection

Show if MContinue Yes

Page

MIntro
In this series of questions when we use the term cannabis, this includes marijuana, hashish, hash oil or any other products made from the cannabis plant but not synthetic cannabinoids.

When we ask about use, this includes using cannabis in its dry form or when mixed or processed into another product such as an edible, concentrate, liquid, or other product for By medical purposes we mean used to treat a disease/disorder or to improve symptoms associated with a disease/disorder. purposes.

By mediBy medical purposes we mean used to treat a disease/disorder or to improve symptoms associated with a disease/disorder.cal purposes we mean used to treat a disease/disorder or to improve symptoms associated with a disease/disorder.

Page Usage_Med

Page Spend_Med

Page DrivingMed

MDInt
You are almost done.

We just have a few more questions about driving while using cannabis for medical purposes.

We appreciate you taking the time to complete the remainder of this survey.

Section End

End
You have now completed the survery

Thank you very much for participating in this survey.
Status Code: -1