Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33221739›Full record

ArticleJournal of behavioral addictions2020

Personal choice is a nuanced concept - Lessons learned from the gambling field. •.

David C Hodgins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

1 author.

David C HodginsUniversity of Calgary, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2737-5200

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This thoughtful framework to minimize the harm associated with emerging technologies by encouraging collaborations among stakeholders would benefit from adopting the WHO precautionary principle in order to keep public health issues at the core of discussions. It would also be helpful to acknowledge and make transparent the differences in stakeholder priorities, the power differentials among stakeholders, and the importance of institutional duty of care.

Indexed as

GamblingHumansPublic Healthbehavioral addictionsconsumer protectionemerging technologiesharm minimizationonline risk-taking

Identifiers

PMID33221739
PMCPMC8969712

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.