The Turkish versions of the Cannabis Use Problems Identification Test (CUPIT) and Cannabis Problems Questionnaire (CPQ) showed good psychometric properties and worked for both cannabis and synthetic cannabinoid use disorder patients.
Read this if you work clinically with cannabis or synthetic cannabinoid users in Turkish-speaking populations.
Both screening tools validated for synthetic cannabinoid users (alpha 0.87-0.89)
What the researchers found
The CUPIT and CPQ questionnaires were validated in a Turkish clinical sample of 52 cannabis users and 45 synthetic cannabinoid users being treated for use disorders. Both instruments showed good internal consistency: CUPIT scored 0.89 and CPQ scored 0.87 (Cronbach's alpha).
The CUPIT and CPQ were strongly correlated with each other (r=0.76) and moderately correlated with the Cannabis Withdrawal Scale (r=0.63 and r=0.74 respectively), supporting convergent validity.
Principal component analysis supported a two-factor structure for the CUPIT. The finding that both tools worked for synthetic cannabinoid users is particularly relevant given the high prevalence of synthetic cannabinoid use in Turkey.
Why it matters
Cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids are widely used in Turkey, and clinicians need validated screening and outcome tools in Turkish. Demonstrating that these instruments work for synthetic cannabinoid users is important because synthetic cannabinoid use disorder is common in Turkey and may present differently from natural cannabis use disorder.
The numbers in context
CUPIT: alpha 0.89. CPQ: alpha 0.87. CUPIT-CPQ correlation: r=0.76. CUPIT-CWS correlation: r=0.63. CPQ-CWS correlation: r=0.74. Sample: 52 cannabis users, 45 synthetic cannabinoid users (all male outpatients).
How the study worked
Psychometric validation study of Turkish translations of the CUPIT and CPQ in 97 male outpatients with cannabis (n=52) or synthetic cannabinoid (n=45) use disorder. Analyses included principal component analysis, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and correlational validity against each other and the Cannabis Withdrawal Scale.
What this study cannot tell us
Male-only sample limits generalizability. Relatively small sample size (97 total). Outpatient treatment-seeking population may differ from community samples. One CPQ subscale (CPQ-C) had low internal consistency (alpha 0.30). The study did not assess test-retest reliability.
How to read the evidence
Psychometric validation study with adequate sample size for reliability analysis. Limited by male-only sample and lack of test-retest data.
When this study was published
Published in 2017. Validated clinical tools for cannabis use disorders continue to be adapted for different languages and populations.
The bigger picture
The availability of validated screening tools in local languages is essential for clinical practice and research worldwide. The applicability to synthetic cannabinoid users is a practical advance, given that many countries face synthetic cannabinoid problems and few validated clinical tools specifically address these substances.
Questions still open
- Would the tools perform similarly in female Turkish patients? Are there meaningful clinical differences between cannabis and synthetic cannabinoid use disorder that these instruments should capture? Can the low-reliability CPQ-C subscale be improved?
Common questions
Why validate cannabis tools for synthetic cannabinoid users?
What is the CUPIT?
Read the original research
Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Versions of the Cannabis Use Problems Identification Test (CUPIT) and the Adult Cannabis Problems Questionnaire (CPQ).
Journal of psychoactive drugs, 49(1), 83-89
Citation
Evren, Cuneyt; Yilmaz Cengel, Hanife; Bozkurt, Muge; Evren, Bilge; Umut, Gokhan; Agachanli, Ruken. (2017). Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Versions of the Cannabis Use Problems Identification Test (CUPIT) and the Adult Cannabis Problems Questionnaire (CPQ).. Journal of psychoactive drugs, 49(1), 83-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2016.1277047
Explore the wider topic
- 30 Days Without Weed: What I Learned
- 6 Months Without Weed: What Nobody Tells You
- 90 Days Weed Free: The Real Long-Term Benefits
- Benefits of Quitting Weed: What Changes After 30, 60, 90 Days
- Quitting Weed and Boredom: The Hardest Part
- The Boredom Problem: Why Nothing Feels Fun After Quitting Weed
- Physical vs Psychological Cannabis Dependence: What Science Actually Shows
- The Gap Between Cannabis Perception and Science: Why What We Believe Outpaces What We Know
- Cannabis Use Disorder: Am I Addicted? Self-Assessment Guide
- Creativity After Quitting Weed: What Actually Happens
- Cross-Addiction After Quitting Weed: When One Habit Replaces Another
- Finding New Hobbies After Quitting Weed
- The Stoner Identity Crisis: Who Am I Without Weed?
- Is Weed Addictive? What the Research Actually Shows
- Is Cannabis Addictive? What the DSM-5 and Brain Science Say
- Leaving Stoner Culture Behind: Rebuilding Your Identity After Weed
- Money Saved Quitting Weed: The Real Numbers
- One Year Without Weed: Reflections on What Actually Changed
- Quitting Weed and Alcohol Together: What to Know About Dual Cessation
- Quitting Weed and Creativity: Will I Lose My Spark?
- Does Quitting Weed Change Your Face?
- Quitting Weed and Weight Changes: Why Some People Lose and Others Gain
- Is Rehab Necessary for Weed? An Honest Assessment
- Signs You May Have Cannabis Use Disorder: An Honest Self-Assessment
- Weed Vape Pen Addiction: Why Vaping Makes It Harder to Quit