ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Qualitative Experience of Self-Exclusion Programs: A Scoping Review.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- User Experiences with Blocking Software and Gambling Recovery: Exploring Motivation, Perceptions & Recovery Supports.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Article
- Mandatory Third-Party Exclusion of Individuals with Gambling Problems in Germany: Data from the OASIS Player Exclusion System.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- Who is Getting the Message? Sociodemographic Factors and Gambling Behavior Associated with Awareness of the Swedish National Self-Exclusion Registry Spelpaus.se.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- Voluntary self-exclusion from gambling: Expert opinions on gaps and needs for improvement.Nordisk alkohol- & narkotikatidskrift : NAT · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gambling disorder is a major public health issue in many countries. It has been defined as a persistent, recurrent pattern of gambling and is associated with substantial distress or impairment, lower quality of life, and living with a plurality of psychiatric problems. Many people suffering from gambling disorder seek help in ways other than formal treatment seeking, including self-management strategies. One example of responsible gambling tools that has gained popularity in recent years is self-exclusion programs. Self-exclusion entails individuals barring themselves from a gambling venue or a virtual platform. The aim of this scoping review is to summarize the literature on this topic and to explore participants' perceptions and experiences with self-exclusion. An electronic literature search was conducted on 16th May 2022 in the following databases: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Education Source, ERIC, MEDLINE with Full Text, APA PsycArticles, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, APA PsychInfo, Social Work Abstracts, and SocINDEX. The search yielded a total of 236 articles, of which 109 remained after duplicates were removed. After full-text reading, six articles were included in this review. The available literature shows that although there are many barriers and limitations to the current self-exclusion programs, self-exclusion is generally viewed as an effective responsible gambling strategy. There is a clear need to improve the current programs by increasing awareness, publicity, availability, staff training, off-site venue exclusion, and technology-assisted monitoring, as well as by adopting more holistic management approaches to gambling disorders in general.
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.