Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34437561›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

"When the Fun Stops, Stop": An analysis of the provenance, framing and evidence of a 'responsible gambling' campaign.

May Ci van Schalkwyk, Nason Maani, Martin McKee, Samantha Thomas, Cécile Knai, Mark Petticrew

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Exploring Perspectives Towards the Gambling Industry and Its Marketing Strategies Among Young People in Western Australia.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

May Ci van SchalkwykFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2210-2289
Nason MaaniFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Martin McKeeFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Samantha ThomasFaculty of Health, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Soc. Dev., Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Cécile KnaiFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Mark PetticrewFaculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Department of Health NIHR300156Medical Research Council MR/S037519/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When the Fun Stops, Stop, is a prominent 'responsible gambling' campaign in the UK, originally funded and delivered by the industry-initiated and funded Senet Group. Since the Senet Group's dissolution in 2020, the campaign has been overseen by the Betting and Gambling Council (BGC), the main gambling industry trade body. There has been no prior analysis of the activities, ideas and framing adopted by the Senet Group, who claimed to be acting as an industry 'watchdog' and oversaw what they characterised as a major public education campaign. We collated written and image-based material related to the Senet Group and its When the Fun Stops, Stop campaign from multiple sources. Guided by Entman's four functions of framing, we analysed the Senet Group's framing of the issues it sought to address, particularly harmful gambling, as well as its causes, and the solutions, focusing on the group's main activity: the delivery of the When the Fun Stops, Stop campaign. We also critically appraised an evaluation of the campaign funded by the Senet Group, using the findings to interrogate the stated claims about the campaign's effectiveness. The analysis showed that the Senet Group's framing of the problem, its causes, and proposed responses resemble those adopted by other industries and industry-funded groups. This involves portraying any harms caused by their products as limited to an atypical minority, rejecting upstream determinants of harm, and promoting individually-targeted voluntary measures, all contrary to the evidence of what works in health promotion, and what would characterise a public health approach. Neither the existing evidence base nor the evidence presented by the Senet Group support their claims about the campaign's effectiveness. These findings add to concerns about industry-funded campaigns in other areas. To minimise conflicts of interest, interventions intended to address gambling-related harms, such as public education campaigns, should be evidence-based and developed, implemented and evaluated completely independent of the industry and industry-funded organisations.

Indexed as

GamblingHealth EducationHumansPublic HealthSelf-Control

Identifiers

PMID34437561
PMCPMC8389453

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.