ArticleJournal of gambling studies2016
Brief Intervention Within Primary Care for At-Risk Gambling: A Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of gambling studies, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Structural gaps in referral and treatment pathways for gambling-related harm: a systematic review of health system responses using the antecedents-decision-outcomes framework.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Should screening for risk of gambling-related harm be undertaken in health, care and support settings? A systematic review of the international evidence.Addiction science & clinical practice · 2021Pooled it
- Brief interventions for problem gambling: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Electronic Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (e-SBIRT) for Gambling Harm: A Mixed-methods Acceptability Study.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- Introducing and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Online Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Gambling Disorder in Routine Addiction Care: Comparative Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Text Comprehension Analyses to Improve Assessment Accuracy: Demonstration Using Gambling Disorder Screening.Journal of gambling studies · 2022Article
- Internet-based cognitive behavior therapy for problem gambling in routine care: protocol for a non-randomized pilot and feasibility trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2020Article
- Suicide Attempt in Patients With Gambling Disorder-Associations With Comorbidity Including Substance Use Disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
- Feasibility of Brief Screening for At-Risk Gambling in Consumer Credit Counseling.Journal of gambling studies · 2019Article
- The General Population's View on Where to Seek Treatment for Gambling Disorder - a General Population Survey.Psychology research and behavior management · 2019Article
- Primary and Secondary Diagnoses of Gambling Disorder and Psychiatric Comorbidity in the Swedish Health Care System-A Nationwide Register Study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies on interventions for at-risk gambling are scarce. This pilot study is the first step in a larger project aimed to develop methods to prevent more serious gambling problems. Drawing on experiences from the alcohol field, the brief intervention (BI) model was tested in a primary care setting. Primary care personnel was trained for 2 days. Patients were screened, and those with signs of problematic gambling were offered a return visit to discuss their gambling habits. Of the 537 screened, 34 (6.3 %) screened positive for problem gambling. Of those, 24 were at-risk gamblers whereof 19 agreed to participate. Six of those 19 took part in a 1-month follow-up. Important information for the planning of upcoming studies was collected from the pilot work. Given that the rate of at-risk gamblers was elevated in this setting we consider primary care a suitable arena for intervention. Staff training and support appeared essential, and questionnaires should be selected that are clear and well-presented so staff feel secure and comfortable with them. The BI model was found to be most suitable for patients already known to the caregiver. The number of participants who were willing to take part in the follow-up was low. To ensure power in future studies, a much larger number of screened patients is evidently necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27038815What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.