SynthesisJournal of gambling studies2025
Executive Function in Gambling Disorder: A Meta-analysis on Neuropsychological Evidence.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurobehavioral Heterogeneity in Problem Gambling Severity and Nicotine Use Risk: Divergent Profiles of Cognitive and Emotional Control.Journal of gambling studies · 2026Article
- Neurocognitive Deficits Associated with Gambling Behavior: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Executive Function, Decision-making, Delay Discounting & Reward Sensitivity.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2026Review
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
Abstract
Gambling disorder (GD) is associated with deficits in various cognitive functions. Specifically for executive function (EF), previous findings are inconsistent, despite deficits being reported for shifting, inhibition, planning, and working memory domains. Although a worse performance in EF measures related to GD severity is often reported, there is a need to clarify current evidence. This study aims to systematically review and perform a meta-analysis to clarify the association between EF deficits and GD. The current study followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocols. The meta-analysis used a random effects model and robust variance estimation to analyze the data, using Hedge's g to report effect sizes. A total of 21 studies were systematically reviewed, of which 17 were included for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was performed for shifting, inhibition, planning, and verbal fluency. Due to a lower number of studies, working memory data was systematically reviewed, but no meta-analysis was performed. Significant effect sizes were found for shifting and inhibition, indicative of deficits in participants with GD. No significant deficits were found for the other EF domains. Working memory results revealed inconsistent evidence, even when divided into verbal and visuospatial modalities. There is enough evidence of deficits in shifting and inhibition in participants with GD. However, better sample characterization should be considered in future studies to better understand the sources of potential heterogeneity. Consideration of gambling severity as a continuous variable could allow for a more detailed analysis of EF alterations across the various degrees of GD.
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.