Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35830876›Full record

SynthesisAddiction (Abingdon, England)2022

Global prevalence of help-seeking for problem gambling: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rimke Bijker, Natalia Booth, Stephanie S Merkouris, Nicki A Dowling, Simone N Rodda

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
19.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 106 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rimke BijkerSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-9150-2078
Natalia BoothSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Stephanie S MerkourisSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9037-6121
Nicki A DowlingSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8592-2407
Simone N RoddaSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-7973-1003
Deakin University · AUUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsMultiple studies have examined barriers and facilitators to help-seeking, but the prevalence of help-seeking for problem gambling (PG) is not well established. We aimed to estimate the international prevalence of help-seeking for PG among the general population and among subgroups of people at risk for PG (i.e. low-risk, moderate-risk and PG).

methodsSystematic search of grey literature (through gambling repositories, gambling research institutes and Google) and peer-reviewed literature (through ProQuest, PsycINFO, PubMed and Scopus) for gambling prevalence studies that reported on help-seeking for PG. This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses. Studies used representative sampling methods to determine the prevalence of gambling participation and data collection 2010 onward. Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. The main outcome was population prevalence of help-seeking for PG. Help-seeking was defined as any intentional action to change gambling behaviours, including professional services (inclusive of in-person or distance help), non-professional help (e.g. from family and friends) and self-help. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explain variability in help-seeking prevalence estimates.

resultsMeasurement of help-seeking was inconsistent across included studies and, overall, there was high risk of bias. We estimated a general population help-seeking prevalence for PG of 0.23% (95% CI, 0.16-0.33). Prevalence estimates were significantly higher in studies assessing lifetime (0.50%; 95% CI, 0.35-0.71) compared with current help-seeking (0.14%; 95% CI, 0.10-0.20, P < 0.001), but there was no evidence of difference in prevalence estimates by gambling participation, region, type of help-seeking, or year of data collection. Compared with people with low-risk gambling (0.27%; 95% CI, 0.07%-1.04%), prevalence estimates were significantly higher in those with moderate-risk (3.73%; 95% CI, 2.07%-6.63%) and problem gambling (20.63%; 95% CI, 12.89%-31.35%, P < 0.001).

conclusionsOne in 25 moderate-risk gamblers and 1 in 5 people with problem gambling have sought help for problems related to their gambling.

Indexed as

GamblingCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPrevalenceGamblinghelp-seekingmeta-analysisprevalencesystematic reviewtreatment

Identifiers

PMID35830876
PMCPMC9796401
OpenAlexW4285391896

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.