ArticleJournal of gambling studies2023
Separating Behaviours and Adverse Consequences in the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI): A Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Rasch Analysis.
Article in Journal of gambling studies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of the Gambling Problem Recognition Scale.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Article
- Spatio-temporal differences in EEG dynamics during decision-making between online poker players with moderate-risk and high-risk gambling activity.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Loot box spending is associated with greater distress when normalized to disposable income: a reanalysis and extension of EtchellsRoyal Society open science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) is considered the "gold standard" for measuring problem gambling. The PGSI provides a single score summed across nine items. The nine items of the PGSI comprise two subdomains: problematic behaviours and adverse consequences. The aim of the present study was to compare evidence of a one-factor structure to evidence of a two-factor structure representing the two subdomains. With a sample of 1,251 bettors, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses and Rasch analyses to assess evidence supporting the one-factor and the two-factor structures. In addition, stochastic search variable selection was conducted with the total PGSI score, PGSI behaviour score, and PGSI adverse consequences score as separate outcomes to examine whether information is lost when collapsing the two subdomains into a single factor. Overall, there was stronger support of a two-factor structure than a one-factor structure. However, the two-factors were highly correlated with one another and shared most predictors except for one. We recommend continued use of the one-factor structure of the PGSI unless one aims to better understand the relationship between problematic behaviours and adverse consequences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37544962What 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.