Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33198709›Full record

ReviewBMC public health2020

A framework for indirect elicitation of the public health impact of gambling problems.

Matthew Browne, Vijay Rawat, Philip Newall, Stephen Begg, Matthew Rockloff, Nerilee Hing

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Perception of Gamblers: A Systematic Review.Journal of gambling studies · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Evolution of Gambling-Related Harm Measurement: Lessons from the Last Decade.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Matthew BrowneSchool of Health, Medical & Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, University Dr, Branyan QLD, Bundaberg, 4670, Australia. m.browne@cqu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2668-6229
Vijay RawatSchool of Health, Medical & Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, University Dr, Branyan QLD, Bundaberg, 4670, Australia.
Philip NewallSchool of Health, Medical & Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, University Dr, Branyan QLD, Bundaberg, 4670, Australia.
Stephen BeggLa Trobe Rural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Australia.
Matthew RockloffSchool of Health, Medical & Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, University Dr, Branyan QLD, Bundaberg, 4670, Australia.
Nerilee HingSchool of Health, Medical & Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, University Dr, Branyan QLD, Bundaberg, 4670, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gambling problems are increasingly understood as a health-related condition, with harms from excessive time and money expenditure contributing to significant population morbidity. In many countries, the prevalence of gambling problems is known with some precision. However, the true severity of gambling problems in terms of their impact on health and wellbeing is the subject of ongoing debate. We firstly review recent research that has attempted to estimate harm from gambling, including studies that estimate disability weights using direct elicitation. Limitations of prior approaches are discussed, most notably potential inflation due to non-independent comorbidity with other substance use and mental health conditions, and potential biases in the subjective attribution of morbidity to gambling. An alternative indirect elicitation approach is outlined, and a conceptual framework for its application to gambling is provided. Significant risk factors for propensity to develop gambling problems are enumerated, and relative risks for comorbidities are calculated from recent meta-analyses and reviews. Indirect elicitation provides a promising alternative framework for assessing the causal link between gambling problems and morbidity. This approach requires implementation of propensity score matching to estimate the counterfactual, and demands high quality information of risk factors and comorbid conditions, in order to estimate the unique contribution of gambling problems. Gambling harm is best understood as a decrement to health utility. However, achieving consensus on the severity of gambling problems requires triangulation of results from multiple methodologies. Indirect elicitation with propensity score matching and accounting for comorbidities would provide an important step towards full integration of gambling within a public health paradigm.

Indexed as

Public HealthBehavior, AddictiveComorbidityGamblingHumansPrevalenceRisk FactorsDisability weightsElicitationGamblingGambling harmGambling problemsGlobal burden of diseaseHealth utility

Identifiers

PMID33198709
PMCPMC7670710

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.