SynthesisJournal of gambling studies2024
A Systematic Review of Attentional Bias in Problem Gambling.
Synthesis 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 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.
- Derived Relations and Attentional Bias for Near-Misses in Slot Machines.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Trial
- Food perception in Orthorexia nervosa: Craving or avoidance?Eating and weight disorders : EWD · 2026Article
- Influence of Negative Attentional Bias on Self-Management and Health-Promoting Behaviors in Orthopedic Patients with Chronic Refractory Wounds: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach.Risk management and healthcare policy · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A large body of previous research has provided support for the role of attentional bias as a maintaining factor in addiction. This systematic review aimed to investigate the extent and nature of attentional bias as a phenomenon which exists within problem gamblers. Studies were identified through searches of three databases (MedLine, PSYCHINFO, and Web of Science) and examination of the reference lists of the final studies meeting criteria for inclusion. The scope of the review included empirical studies making experimental comparisons of problem gamblers and non-problem gamblers across a range of attentional paradigms. A comparison of effect sizes was conducted across studies comparing problem to non-problem gamblers within and between attention paradigms. Twenty-two studies were reviewed systematically across ten experimental paradigms. Attentional bias was demonstrated in 16 of the 22 studies, with attentional bias effects varying across paradigms. Quality assessment revealed two main limitations across studies: lack of a priori power analysis, and failure to control for gambling frequency as a possible confounding variable. Findings support the role of attentional bias as a potential maintaining factor in problem gambling behaviour, in line with evidence for substance addiction. Recommendations for future studies are outlined alongside a discussion of clinical implications.
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.