Suchergebnisse

Medical cannabis is a topic of increasing debate. To investigate this issue, we conducted a content analysis of Israeli news coverage of medical cannabis from 2007 to 2013. A deductive framing analysis examined three elite issue frames—medical, policy, and law enforcement. Additionally, inductive analysis revealed a a fourth, nonelite patients' frame. Each frame was associated with a distinct pattern of textual elements, including portrayal of patients, references to cannabis, opinion about medical cannabis, and salience of scientific research. The most common and most stable frame was the policy frame. Implications for framing theory are discussed.

Few empirical studies have explored how different types of knowledge are associated with diverse objectivities and moral economies. Here, we examine these associations through an empirical investigation of the public policy debate in Israel around medical cannabis (MC), which may be termed a contested medicine because its therapeutic effects, while subjectively felt by users, are not generally recognized by the medical profession. Our findings indicate that beneath the MC debate lie deep-seated issues of epistemology, which are entwined with questions of ethics and morality. Whereas some stakeholder groups viewed evidence-based medicine and mechanical objectivity as the only valid knowledge base, others called for recognition of a particular experience-based knowledge, championing regulatory, administrative, or strong objectivity. Stakeholders' interpretations of what should be considered as ethical courses of (in)action corresponded to their epistemological views, with most criticizing the regulators for relying on regulatory subjectivity instead of objectivity. Our in-depth mapping of this arena allowed us not only to shed light on the emergence of the new entity called "medical cannabis" but also to reexamine the link between epistemology, ethics, and action and to elucidate how heterogeneous groups view the validity and objectivity of knowledge and the interface between medicine, science, and policy.

<b><i>Background and Aim:</i></b> Little evidence is available on whether respondents from divergent sociocultural populations report alcohol consumption in systematically similar ways. Therefore, this study examined whether the validity of self-reported alcohol use differed between Arab and Jewish Israeli pub patrons. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The analytical sample consisted of 227 Arab and 900 Jewish Israeli pub patrons who were approached as they left pubs and asked to record their Breath Alcohol Content (BrAC) value and complete a questionnaire that probed into their alcohol use. Validity of self-reported alcohol use across the 2 groups was examined by testing the discrepancy in concordance between the self-reported number of drinks and BrAC scores through simple Pearson correlations and by performing a multi-group measurement invariance (MI) comparison. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The Pearson correlation between the self-reported number of drinks and BrAC by the ethno-cultural group was almost identical across groups (Jews: <i>r</i> = 0.47, <i>p</i> < 0.01, df = 898; Arabs: <i>r</i> = 0.42, <i>p</i> < 0.01, df = 225). MI test results further confirmed that the factor loadings of the 2 drinking measures are similar across the 2 ethno-cultural groups. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Self-reported alcohol consumption gives cross-culturally valid and acceptable estimates of alcohol consumption in this sample of Israeli Arabs and Jews.

It is common practice in survey questionnaires to include a general open and non-directive feedback question at the end, but the analysis of this type of data is rarely discussed in the methodological literature. While these open-ended comments can be useful, most researchers fail to report on this issue. The aim of this article is to illustrate and reflect upon the benefits and challenges of analyzing responses to open-ended feedback questions. The article describes the experiences of coding and analyzing data generated through a feedback question at the end of an international online survey with small-scale cannabis cultivators carried out by the Global Cannabis Cultivation Research Consortium. After describing the design and dataset of the web survey, the analytical approach and coding frame are presented. The analytical strategies chosen in this study illustrate the diversity and complexity of feedback comments which pose methodological challenges to researchers wishing to use them for data analyses. In this article, three types of feedback comments (political/policy comments, general comments of positive and negative appreciation, and methodological comments) are used to illustrate the difficulties and advantages of analyzing this type of data. The advantages of analyzing feedback comments are well known, but they seem to be rarely exploited. General feedback questions at the end of surveys are typically non-directive. If researchers want to use these data for research and analyses, they need a clear strategy. They ought to give enough thought to why they are including this type of question, and develop an analytical strategy at the design stage of the study.