Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39102018›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gambling studies2025

Neurophysiological Correlates of Near-Wins in Gambling: A Systematic Literature Review.

Artemisa Rocha Dores, Miguel Peixoto, Carina Fernandes, Andreia Geraldo, Mark D Griffiths, Fernando Barbosa

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gambling studies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

Artemisa Rocha DoresLaboratório de Reabilitação Psicossocial - Centro de Investigação em Reabilitação (LabRP-CIR), Escola Superior de Saúde, Polytechnic Institute of Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 400, Porto, 4200-072, Portugal. artemisa@ess.ipp.pt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4595-9816
Miguel PeixotoLaboratório de Reabilitação Psicossocial - Centro de Investigação em Reabilitação (LabRP-CIR), Escola Superior de Saúde, Polytechnic Institute of Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 400, Porto, 4200-072, Portugal.
Carina FernandesLaboratory of Neuropsychophysiology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, Porto, 4200-135, Portugal.
Andreia GeraldoLaboratório de Reabilitação Psicossocial - Centro de Investigação em Reabilitação (LabRP-CIR), Escola Superior de Saúde, Polytechnic Institute of Porto, Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida, 400, Porto, 4200-072, Portugal.
Mark D GriffithsInternational Gaming Research Unit, Psychology Department, Nottingham Trent University, 50 Shakespeare Street, Nottingham, UK.
Fernando BarbosaLaboratory of Neuropsychophysiology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, Porto, 4200-135, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identification of specific patterns of brain activity related to problem gambling may provide a deeper understanding of its underlying mechanisms, highlighting the importance of neurophysiological studies to better understand development and persistence of gambling behavior. The patterns of cognitive functioning have been investigated through electroencephalography (EEG) studies based on the near-win/near-miss (NW) effect. The main goal of the present study was to evaluate the neurophysiological basis of NWs and their modulation by gambling problems through a systematic review of event-related potentials (ERP) studies elicited by feedback events. The review followed the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA). A total of 15 studies were included, 12 comprising non-problem gamblers (NPGs) and three comparing problem gamblers (PGs) with matched controls. For the P300 component, the win outcome elicited a larger amplitude than the other outcomes (NW and loss), followed by the NW outcome, which elicited a larger amplitude than loss in some studies. For feedback-related negativity (FRN), the loss outcome evoked a more negative amplitude in several studies, despite eliciting a similar amplitude to NW outcomes in others. For PGs, the NW outcome evoked a higher amplitude of P300 than loss, while NPGs showed a similar amplitude to both outcomes. The present review gathered information from different sources and provides a consistent view of the different studies. However, studies lack systematic and robust methodologies, leading to inconsistent results and making it difficult to reach any definitive conclusions.

Indexed as

Behavior, AddictiveBrainEvoked PotentialsFeedback, PsychologicalGamblingElectroencephalographyEvent-Related Potentials, P300HumansRewardEvent-related potentials (ERP)Feedback-related negativity (FRN)GamblingNear missNear WinP300

Identifiers

PMID39102018
PMCPMC11860989

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.