Trial reportJournal of gambling studies2020
Web-Based Intervention and Email-Counseling for Problem Gamblers: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
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.
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
10 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
- Internet-based interventions for behavioral addictions: A systematic review.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2022Pooled it
- Internet-based treatment of gambling problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2021Pooled it
- Computerized cognitive training for problem gambling: A randomized controlled trial (TRAIN-online).Journal of behavioral addictions · 2025Trial
- Emotion regulation-enhanced group treatment for gambling disorder: a non-randomized pilot trial.BMC psychiatry · 2022Trial
- What is known about population level programs designed to address gambling-related harm: rapid review of the evidence.Harm reduction journal · 2024Review
- The evaluation of a brief ICBT program with therapist support for individuals with gambling problems in the context of a gambling helpline: a randomized pilot trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- Internet-delivered therapist-assisted cognitive behavioral therapy for gambling disorder: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Client's Experiences Using a Location-Based Technology ICT System during Gambling Treatments' Crucial Components: A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Efficacy of an internet-based psychological intervention for problem gambling and gambling disorder: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Internet interventions · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.