Online self-exclusion from multiple gambling venues: Stakeholder co-design of a usable and acceptable self-directed website.

D Pickering, A Serafimovska, S J Cho, A Blaszczynski, S M Gainsbury

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Internet interventions, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

Context matters: A meta-ethnography investigating barriers and facilitators for the effective implementation of gambling harm prevention and reduction policies.PloS one · 2026
Article
Effects and Limitations of a Unique, Nationwide, Self-Exclusion Service for Gambling Disorder and Its Self-Perceived Effects and Harms in Gamblers: Protocol for a Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023
Article
Qualitative Experience of Self-Exclusion Programs: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
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

5 authors.

D PickeringScience Faculty, School of Psychology, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

A SerafimovskaScience Faculty, School of Psychology, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

S J ChoScience Faculty, School of Psychology, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

A BlaszczynskiScience Faculty, School of Psychology, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

S M GainsburyScience Faculty, School of Psychology, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gambling self-exclusion programs are under-utilised and barriers to entry include shame and embarrassment with face-to-face registration, and complex and effortful procedures. The current study aimed to facilitate self-exclusion from gambling venues via an online self-directed website. A co-design approach was used to elicit key stakeholders' perspectives on required website features, functionality, and to identify variables potentially impacting on development and implementation. Semi-structured focus groups and interviews were conducted across four stakeholders (

Indexed as

Co-designeHealthGambling disorderHarm minimizationOnline self-exclusionSelf-directed intervention

Identifiers

PMID35004185

DOI10.1016/j.invent.2021.100491

PMCPMC8715329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC-ND

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.