Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37634166›Full record

ReviewJournal of gambling studies2024

Behavioural Tracking and Profiling Studies Involving Objective Data Derived from Online Operators: A Review of the Evidence.

Paul Delfabbro, Jonathan Parke, Maris Catania

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of gambling studies, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

3 authors.

Paul DelfabbroSchool of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. Paul.delfabbro@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0466-5611
Jonathan ParkeSophro Ltd, Newark, UK.
Maris CataniaKindred Group, Valletta, Malta.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies involving the analysis of objective data from online operators attempt to address common concerns about biases in self-report research. This paper surveys the progress in this area of research over the last 15 years. The findings highlight many areas of achievement, including: the development of a set of behavioural markers that reliably differentiate variations in gambler risk. Online gamblers can be grouped into clusters based on the intensity and frequency of gambling; behavioural variability; or, signs of over-commitment (e.g., deposit frequency or expenditure patterns). Behavioural indicators have also been successfully used to predict proxies of harm such as self-exclusion or account closures. However, relatively few studies have combined objective data with self-report data to achieve independent validation of the risk-status of gamblers. Evidence also supports the potential value of short-term responsible gambling interventions involving the use of voluntary and mandatory limits, messages and behavioural feedback. Less work has, on the other hand, addressed the comparative risk of different online gambling products. The findings suggest the need for further validation of findings against independent measures of gambling risk; consistent definitions of indicators; a greater focus on the differentiation of product risk; and, on the long-term impact of RG interventions.

Indexed as

Behavior, AddictiveGamblingHumansInternetRisk-TakingSelf ReportBehavioural indicatorsOnline gamblingProblem gamblingResponsible gamblingRisk

Identifiers

PMID37634166
PMCPMC11272745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.