Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31560101›Full record

Trial reportJournal of gambling studies2020

Web-Based Intervention and Email-Counseling for Problem Gamblers: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Benjamin Jonas, Fabian Leuschner, Anna Eiling, Christine Schoelen, Renate Soellner, Peter Tossmann

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of gambling studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Benjamin JonasDelphi - Gesellschaft für Forschung, Beratung und Projektentwicklung mbH, Kaiserdamm 8, 14057, Berlin, Germany. jonas@delphi.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9146-1501
Fabian LeuschnerDelphi - Gesellschaft für Forschung, Beratung und Projektentwicklung mbH, Kaiserdamm 8, 14057, Berlin, Germany.
Anna EilingDelphi - Gesellschaft für Forschung, Beratung und Projektentwicklung mbH, Kaiserdamm 8, 14057, Berlin, Germany.
Christine SchoelenFederal Centre for Health Education (BZgA), Cologne, Germany.
Renate SoellnerUniversity of Hildesheim, Hildesheim, Germany.
Peter TossmannDelphi - Gesellschaft für Forschung, Beratung und Projektentwicklung mbH, Kaiserdamm 8, 14057, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Web-based interventions have the potential to reduce the treatment gap for problem gambling. In the past years, several web-based help options were made available to the public. However, only few studies were conducted to test their effects. This study investigated the efficacy of two interventions for problem gamblers provided online by the German Federal Center for Health Education (BZgA). The first intervention is the guided program "Check Out" (CO), the second is email counselling (EC). A web-based randomized controlled trial with follow-up surveys after 3, 6 and 12 months was conducted. Participants were allocated to CO, to EC or to a waitlist (WL). Outcomes were the degree of problem gambling according to the Problem Gambling Severity Index, the number of days gambled in past 30 days, the highest stake during the past 30 days and the subjective well-being (WHO-5). 167 individuals were included in the trial. In comparison to the WL at the 3 months follow-up, participants of CO showed significant improvements with moderate to strong effect sizes in all outcomes. Strongest effects were found in the problem gambling severity (d = 0.91; p = 0.023), followed by the well-being (d = 0.70; p = 0.011), the gambling days (d = 0.59; p = 0.001) and the highest stake (d = 0.55; p = 0.012). Improvements were sustained until last follow-up. Compared to the WL, users of EC had beneficiary results in the problem gambling severity (d = 0.74; p = 0.022). No significant effect differences were found between CO and EC. However, according to process evaluation, users of CO reported a significantly stronger working alliance than users of EC (d = 0.70; p = 0.019) and used the intervention considerably longer (d = 0.84; p = 0.004). CO helps treatment-seeking individuals to sustainably reduce their gambling behavior and to increase their general well-being. Compared to EC, CO seems a better support option, since its effects include a wider range of outcomes. Possible reasons are the more engaging program structure and elements of CO, as well as the closer interaction between client and counselor.

Indexed as

Electronic MailInternet-Based InterventionTelemedicineAdultCounselingFemaleGamblingHumansMaleCounselingEmailGambling disorderPathological gamblingPreventionProblem gambling

Identifiers

PMID31560101
PMCPMC7674348

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.