Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30736817›Full record

ReviewHarm reduction journal2019

A mapping review of research on gambling harm in three regulatory environments.

David G Baxter, Margo Hilbrecht, Cameron T J Wheaton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Harm reduction journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Public health implications of the deregulation and privatization of online and sports gambling in Canada.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Evolution of Gambling-Related Harm Measurement: Lessons from the Last Decade.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

David G BaxterGambling Research Exchange Ontario, 55 Wyndham St. N., Suite 214A, Guelph, ON, N1H 7T8, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5235-6728
Margo HilbrechtGambling Research Exchange Ontario, 55 Wyndham St. N., Suite 214A, Guelph, ON, N1H 7T8, Canada. margo@greo.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-7615-7595
Cameron T J WheatonGambling Research Exchange Ontario, 55 Wyndham St. N., Suite 214A, Guelph, ON, N1H 7T8, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8870-1826

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHarmful gambling is a complex issue with diverse antecedents and resulting harms that have been studied from multiple disciplinary perspectives. Although previous bibliometric reviews of gambling studies have found a dominance of judgement and decision-making research, no bibliometric review has examined the concept of "harm" in the gambling literature, and little work has quantitatively assessed how gambling research priorities differ between countries.

methodsGuided by the Conceptual Framework of Harmful Gambling (CFHG), an internationally relevant framework of antecedents to harmful gambling, we conducted a bibliometric analysis focusing on research outputs from three countries with different gambling regulatory environments: Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Using a Web of Science database search, 1424 articles published from 2008 to 2017 were retrieved that could be mapped to the eight CFHG factors. A subsample of articles (n = 171) containing the word "harm" in the title, abstract, or keywords was then drawn. Descriptive statistics were used to examine differences between countries and trends over time with regard to CFHG factor and harm focus.

resultsPsychological and biological factors dominate gambling research in Canada whereas resources and treatment have received more attention in New Zealand. A greater percentage of Australia and New Zealand publications address the gambling environment and exposure to gambling than in Canada. The subset of articles focused on harm showed a stronger harms focus among New Zealand and Australian researchers compared to Canadian-authored publications.

conclusionsThe findings provide preliminary bibliometric evidence that gambling research foci may be shaped by jurisdictional regulation of gambling. Countries with privately operated gambling focused on harm factors that are the operators' responsibility, whereas jurisdictions with a public health model focused on treatment and harm reduction resources. In the absence of a legislated requirement for public health or harm minimisation focus, researchers in jurisdictions with government-operated gambling tend to focus research on factors that are the individual's responsibility and less on the harms they experience. Given increased international attention to gambling-related harm, regulatory and research environments could promote and support more diverse research in this area.

Indexed as

ResearchAustraliaBibliometricsCanadaGamblingHarm ReductionHumansNew ZealandSocioeconomic FactorsAustraliaBibliometric analysisCanadaConceptual Framework of Harmful GamblingGambling harmMapping reviewNew Zealand

Identifiers

PMID30736817
PMCPMC6368783

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.