Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 90, Issue 5, pp 304–308 | Cite as

A Multivariate Regression Analysis of Adolescent Multiple Drug Use in Two Western Canadian Provinces

  • David A. HayEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article reports on the results of a multiple regression analysis of an adolescent multiple drug use index on 17 predictor variables from the PRIDE CANADA Drug survey with 18,685 Grades 9 through 12 students in two Western Canadian provinces in 1995–96. The predictor variables represent eight familial, five school and peer, and four individual level attributes and behaviours.

The regression analysis is used to estimate the combined effects along with the relative importance of the predictor variables on the students’ self-reported use of 11 drugs combined into a multiple drug use index. Separate analyses are conducted for the male and female students.

The results indicate that two of the most important predictor variables are the frequency with which both the female and male students report getting into trouble at school and the frequency of the students’ participation in worship. The relative importance of these two variables and other variables in relation to the students’ multiple use of drugs differ to some extent for the two genders.

Résumé

L’objectif de cet article est de rendre compte des résultats obtenus à l’aide d’une équation de régression multiple d’un index d’utilisation de plusieurs drogues par un adolescent sur 17 variables explicatives provenant du sondage sur la drogue “PRIDE CANADA”. Ce sondage a été mené auprès de 18 685 élèves de la neuvième à la douzième année dans deux provinces de l’ouest canadien en 1995–96. Les variables explicatives sont: la famille (8), l’école et les pairs (5) ainsi que les qualités personnelles et les comportements de l’individu (4).

Cette analyse a pour but d’étudier les effets combinés et l’importance relative des variables explicatives en relation avec l’auto-déclaration des étudiants de l’utilisation de 11 drogues combinées dans un index multiple. Des analyses séparées ont été faites tant pour les étudiants que pour les étudiantes.

Les résultats indiquent que les deux plus importantes variables explicatives sont la fréquence à laquelle les étudiants et les étudiantes rapportent avoir de la difficulté à l’école et la fréquence à laquelle les deux genres participent dans une religion. L’importance relative de ces deux variables ainsi que des autres variables en relation avec l’utilisation multiple de drogues diffère, jusqu’à un certain degré, pour les deux genres.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Donovan JE, Jessor R. Problem drinking and the dimension of involvement with drugs: A Guttman scalogram analysis of adolescent drug use. Am J Public Health 1983;73(5): 543–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bailey SL. Adolescents’ multisubstance use patterns: The role of heavy alcohol and cigarette use. Am J Public Health 1992;82(9):1220–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bailey SL, Flewelling RL, Rachal JV. Predicting continued use of marijuana among adolescents: The relative influence of drug-specific and social context factors. J Health Soc Behav 1992;33:51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boyle MH, Offord DR. Smoking, drinking and use of illicit drugs among adolescents in Ontario: Prevalence, patterns of use and sociodemographic correlates. Can Med Assoc J 1986;135(10):1113–21.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grobe C, Campbell E. Who is using what in public schools: The interrelationship among public alcohol, drug and tobacco use by adolescents in New Brunswick classrooms. J Alcohol and Drug Educ 1990;35(3):1–11.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carlson BR, Davis JL. Demographic variables and recreational substance use among college students. J Drug Educ 1988;18(1):71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Single E, Kandel D, Faust R. Patterns of multiple drug use in high school. J Health Soc Behav 1974;15(4): 344–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kandel DB, Treiman D, Faust R, Single E. Adolescent involvement in legal and illegal drug use: A multiple classification analysis. Social Forces 1976;55(2):438–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marguiles RZ, Kessler RC, Kandel DB. A longitudinal study of onset of drinking among high-school students. J Stud Alcohol 1977;38(5):897–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Whitehead PC, Smart R, Laforest L. Multiple drug use among marijuana smokers in Eastern Canada. Int J Addict 1972;7:179–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smart RG, Adlaf EM. Patterns of drug use among adolescents: The past decade. Soc Sci Med 1986;23(7):717–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Feldman W, Hodgson C, Corber S, Quinn A. Health concerns and health-related behaviours of adolescents. Can Med Assoc J 1986;134(5):489–93.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sorenson AM, Brownfield D. Patterns of adolescent drug use: Inferences from latent structure analysis. Soc Sci Res 1989;18(3):271–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kandel D. Stages in adolescent involvement in drug use. Science 1957;190(4217):912–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kandel D, Faust R. Sequence and stages in patterns of adolescent drug use. Arch Gen Psych 1975;32(7): 923–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kandel DB, Yamaguchi K, Chen K. Stages of progression in drug involvement from adolescence to adulthood: Further evidence for the gateway theory. J Stud Alcohol 1992;53(5):447–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jessor R, Jessor SL. Adolescent development and the onset of drinking: A longitudinal study. J Stud Alcohol 1975;36(1):27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yamaguchi K, Kandel DB. Patterns of drug use from adolescence to young adulthood: II sequences of progression. Am J Public Health 1984;74(7): 668–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Craig JR, Emshoff J. The PRIDE questionnaire for Grades 6–12 development study. Technical Report No. 1. Western Kentucky University and Georgia State University, 1987.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Adams RD. The PRIDE questionnaire for Grades 6–12 development study. Technical Report No. 2. Western Kentucky University, Department of Educational Leadership, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations