ReviewBMC public health2018
Strategies to customize responsible gambling messages: a review and focus group study.
Review in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preventive Interventions and Harm Reduction in Online and Electronic Gambling: A Systematic Review.Journal of gambling studies · 2023Pooled it
- Gambling Marketing Strategies and the Internet: What Do We Know? A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Pooled it
- Educational interventions for erroneous gambling beliefs among Norwegian online casino players: a large-scale real-world study of behavioural impact.Harm reduction journal · 2026Trial
- Peer Effects, Warning Messages, and Gambling Behavior: Evidence from a Lab-in-the-field Experiment.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Trial
- Acceptability and Perceived Usefulness of a Digital Gambling Harm Minimization Tool: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- There, but Invisible: Warning Messages in Czech Gambling Advertising during Football Broadcasts.European addiction research · 2026Article
- 'Out of sight, out of mind' - results of a focus group study on gamblers' use and evaluation of player protection measures in Germany.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Responsible Gambling Messages: A Rapid Evidence Assessment.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Review
- The Profiles of People who Do not Engage in Positive Play while Gambling.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- The Relevance of Marketing in Sports Betting Perceptions and Behaviors Across Different age Groups.Journal of gambling studies · 2024Review
- What is known about population level programs designed to address gambling-related harm: rapid review of the evidence.Harm reduction journal · 2024Review
- Pictograms to aid laypeople in identifying the addictiveness of gambling products (PictoGRRed study).Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Gamblers' Perception of the Playscan Risk Assessment: A Mixed-Methods Study.Journal of gambling studies · 2022Article
- A Comparison of Two GameSense Implementation Approaches: How Program Awareness and Engagement Relate to Gambling Beliefs and Behaviors.Journal of gambling studies · 2022Article
- Minding the consumer mindsets in addressing gambling consumption harms.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Gambling Industry Employees' Experiences with an Onsite Responsible Gambling Program.Journal of gambling studies · 2021Article
- Gambling Self-Control Strategies: A Qualitative Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Perspective of Internet Poker Players on Harm-Reduction Strategies: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- "It did not apply to me": poker players' perspectives of prevention messages.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResponsible gambling messages are widely used as a tool to enable informed choice and encourage appropriate gambling behavior. It is generally accepted that gamblers have different levels of risk of developing gambling problems and require various harm minimization tools and resources. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that responsible gambling messages should be customized and target specific groups of gamblers. This project aimed to understand hypothesized differences between cohorts of gamblers and receive qualitative feedback on archetypal targeted messages used to increase use of responsible gambling tools.
methodsFocus groups were held to test messages for specific cohorts: young adults (18-24 years), seniors (60+ years), frequent gamblers (weekly), and gamblers of skill-based games (poker, sports betting).
resultsCohorts exhibited different preferences and responses to message archetypes. Seniors preferred messages about limit setting, whilst young adults and frequent gamblers responded to messages about their own play and expertise. Skill game gamblers were interested in the odds of winning and their own outcomes over time. However, all groups agreed that using positive, non-judgmental language in messaging is important.
conclusionsThis research makes an important contribution to the field by demonstrating that the wording of message content will likely influence the effectiveness of such messages differentially across various groups of gamblers for engaging gamblers in harm reduction tools. Guidance is provided on themes that can be used by public health marketers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.