ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022
One size does not fit all. Should gambling loss limits be based on income?
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Loss Limits as a Predictor of Future Gambling Behavior.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Article
- Gambling and hidden practices in forensic psychiatry: a qualitative study of ambivalence, autonomy, and negotiated care.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Correlates of Problem Gambling in Canada: The Moderating Effect of Sex.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- Striving Towards National Lower-Risk Gambling Guidelines: An Empirical Investigation Among a Sample of Swedish Gamblers.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- A Longitudinal Investigation of Lower-Risk Gambling Limits in the Canadian National Study.Journal of gambling studies · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous research has suggested empirically based gambling loss limits, with the goal of preventing gambling related harm in the population. However, there is a lack of studies relating gambling loss limits to individual factors such as income. The current study examines whether gambling loss limits should be income-specific. Materials and methods: The dataset was derived from three representative cross-sectional surveys of the Norwegian population and consisted of 14,630 gamblers. Four income groups, based on a quartile approximation, were formed. Gambling related harm was measured with the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), and precision-recall (PR) analyses were used to identify loss limits for the different income groups at two levels of gambling severity: moderate-risk gambling and problem gambling. Results: For both levels of gambling severity, we found the lowest income group to have the lowest gambling loss limits, and the highest income group to have the highest loss limits, which compared to the loss limits for the total sample, were lower and higher, respectively. Calculating the cut-offs for moderate-risk gamblers, we found a consistently ascending pattern from the lowest to the highest income group. Calculating the cut-offs for problem gamblers, we found a similar pattern except for the two middle income groups. Conclusion: The results suggest that income moderates empirically derived gambling loss limits. Although replication is required, income-based gambling loss limits may have higher applied value for preventing gambling related harm, compared to general loss limits aimed at the entire population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.