Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42177499›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2026

Gambling help seeking and self-management in New Zealand and Australia: a cross-sectional survey with quota sampling of priority populations.

Simone N Rodda, Annie S K Jones, Richard J Siegert, Stephanie S Merkouris, Rimke Bijker, Edmond Fehoko, Damita Schuh, Nicki A Dowling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Simone N RoddaDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand. simone.rodda@aut.ac.nz.
Annie S K JonesDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Richard J SiegertDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Stephanie S MerkourisSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia.
Rimke BijkerDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Edmond FehokoDepartment of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Damita SchuhHapaitia Consultancy, Waikato, New Zealand.
Nicki A DowlingSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEfforts to address gambling harm often rely on narrow definitions of help seeking that focus on professional treatment. This approach overlooks the many other ways people seek support, use tools, or take action to reduce or control their gambling. This study aimed to examine the uptake of a broader range of help seeking and self-management approaches among people who gamble, across priority populations, including Māori, Pacific, Asian and Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI), and among people experiencing different levels of gambling harm.

methodsA 58-item checklist on help seeking options contained three domains: People and Places (n = 33 items), Tools and Resources (n = 12 items) and Self-Help Strategies (n = 13 items). It was administered online to 514 adults in New Zealand and Australia, using quota sampling for ethnicity and gambling severity (75% past or current problems, 25% regular gamblers). Respondents indicated how often they had engaged in each help-seeking behaviour over the past 12 months.

resultsOverall, 97% of participants reported using at least one help-seeking option. People and Places were widely used (80.5%) with the most frequently endorsed items being partner, family member, or friend (62.3%), peers in social or cultural groups (44.9%), general practitioners (44.6%) and mental health counsellors (44.4%). Tools and Resources were used by 87.0% and included time-outs (64.8%), reading online information (63.0%), and spending limits (62.5%). Self-Help Strategies were used by 95.5% including lifestyle change (84.2%), setting time or money limits (83.3%), thinking differently about gambling (80.9%), and self-monitoring thoughts, feelings, or behaviours (77.0%). Priority populations had higher uptake of help-seeking options across each of the three domains than non-priority populations. Help seeking increased across levels of gambling severity. Eighty percent of people with no gambling problems reported using any option, compared with 97.9% at low risk and 100% among those with moderate risk or problem gambling.

conclusionsHelp seeking extended well beyond specialist gambling services and included family, community and general health settings. This suggests that responses to gambling harm already occur across a wide range of everyday settings and highlights the need to better understand and strengthen these community responses. Future research should examine how different options connect to form pathways of support and how effective these pathways are over time.

Indexed as

GamblingHelp-Seeking BehaviorPatient Acceptance of Health CareSelf-ManagementAdolescentAdultAustraliaAustralian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander PeoplesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMaori PeopleMiddle AgedNew ZealandPacific Island PeopleGamblingHelp-seekingMeasurementPrevalencePublic healthRecoverySelf-helpTreatment

Identifiers

PMID42177499
PMCPMC13378174

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.