Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40735811›Full record

ArticleHealth promotion international2025

'Industry still has too loud a voice': expert views on government policy consultations about gambling marketing.

Samantha Thomas, Simone McCarthy, Hannah Pitt, Grace Arnot, Melanie Randle, Mike Daube

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion international, 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. 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

6 authors.

Samantha ThomasInstitute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Locked Bag 20001, Geelong 20000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1427-7775
Simone McCarthyInstitute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Locked Bag 20001, Geelong 20000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2671-3511
Hannah PittInstitute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Locked Bag 20001, Geelong 20000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4259-6186
Grace ArnotInstitute for Health Transformation, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Locked Bag 20001, Geelong 20000, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5646-6366
Melanie RandleFaculty of Business and Law, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenue, Gwynneville, NSW 2500, Australia.
Mike DaubeFaculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia 6845, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council Discovery DP210101983
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Marketing is part of the suite of tactics used by the gambling industry and its allies to promote and normalize gambling. While there have been increased public calls for restrictions on gambling marketing, few governments have developed comprehensive policy responses to counter this public health threat. Consultation processes are widely seen as an important part of public decision-making and policy formation. However, there has been limited focus on these processes in gambling policy development. Using an online qualitative survey this study gathered opinions from 33 experts from Australia, the UK, and the USA (including from local governments, academia, not for profits, and lived experience organizations) about the consultation processes related to gambling marketing policy, and how current processes could be improved. A reflexive approach to thematic analysis was used to construct three themes from the data. First, participants perceived that current consultation processes were inconsistent with public health values and approaches with limited meaningful opportunities for community actors to shape and strengthen policy responses to gambling marketing. Second, participants stated that consultation practices prioritized industry views and concerns, with industry actors (and their allies) having disproportionate access to policymakers and decision-makers. Finally, participants commented that there were few mechanisms to ensure that policy developments related to gambling marketing are protected from vested interests. This paper provides new information about the factors that influence policy decisions about gambling marketing. Mechanisms to protect policy from vested interests are essential in developing comprehensive public health responses to gambling marketing.

Indexed as

GamblingMarketingPolicy MakingPublic PolicyAustraliaDecision MakingHealth PolicyHumansPublic HealthQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomUnited Statescommercial determinants of healthgamblingmarketingpolicypolitical determinants of healthqualitative

Identifiers

PMID40735811
PMCPMC12308132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.