Secondary analysis identifies distinct digital engagement profiles in cannabis users, indicating that higher program engagement does not necessarily yield greater reductions in use.
Background Understanding and optimizing engagement in digital interventions remains a significant challenge. This study aims to identify different patterns of engagement among users of a digital intervention to reduce cannabis use. Method We conducted a secondary analysis of engagement data from the intervention group of a study on the effectiveness of a digital cannabis intervention (ICan). Engagement patterns were identified through a latent class analysis using eight engagement indicator variables. The bias-adjusted three-step approach was used to examine differences in baseline characteristics across classes and associations with average change-from-baseline scores in cannabis use frequency and quantity. Results Three latent classes were identified: Class 1 (32%), ‘non-engagers’, showed minimal to no engagement; Class 2 (41%), ‘shorter-term engagers’, showed moderate engagement in the intervention, but with a shorter duration than recommended; Class 3 (27%), ‘long-term engagers’, showed high engagement in the intervention with a duration meeting the recommendations. The proportion of males was significantly higher in the ‘non-engagers’ class compared to the others. The ‘long-term engagers’ class reported fewer tobacco use days at baseline compared to the others. No differences were found between classes regarding average change-from-baseline scores in cannabis use frequency and quantity. Conclusions Users of digital interventions show distinct engagement patterns, and characteristics such as male gender and tobacco use may predict sub-optimal engagement. Importantly, also sub-optimal exposure to a digital intervention may be associated with changes in cannabis use, as higher engagement does not necessarily lead to greater effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olthof et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: