ReviewJournal of behavioral addictions2023
Thinking beyond cut-off scores in the assessment of potentially addictive behaviors: A brief illustration in the context of binge-watching.
Review in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The relationship between trait mindfulness and problematic usage of the internet, screen time, and nomophobia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2025Pooled it
- Mindfulness programs for problematic usage of the internet: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2024Pooled it
- The Semi-Structured Clinical Interview for the Assessment of Compulsive Sexual Behavior (SSCI-CSB): Development, Reliability, and Validity.Journal of clinical psychology · 2026Article
- The roles of binge gaming in social, academic and mental health outcomes and gender differences: A school-based survey in Hong Kong.PloS one · 2025Article
- Exploring Differences in Four Types of Online Activities Across Individuals with and without Problematic Smartphone Use.The Psychiatric quarterly · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While applying a diagnostic approach (i.e., comparing "clinical" cases with "healthy" controls) is part of our methodological habits as researchers and clinicians, this approach has been particularly criticized in the behavioral addictions research field, in which a lot of studies are conducted on "emerging" conditions. Here we exemplify the pitfalls of using a cut-off-based approach in the context of binge-watching (i.e., watching multiple episodes of series back-to-back) by demonstrating that no reliable cut-off scores could be determined with a widely used assessment instrument measuring binge-watching.
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.