Trial reportJournal of clinical psychology2026
Evaluating the Efficacy of Electronic Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (e-SBIRT) for Gambling: An Online Pilot Randomised Trial.
Trial report in Journal of clinical psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesTo investigate the efficacy of electronic screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (e-SBIRT) at improving gambling outcomes and increasing help-seeking.
methodsWe conducted a two-arm, randomised online pilot trial (n = 83) comparing an e-SBIRT intervention with an active control over 12 weeks. The brief intervention was informed by motivational interviewing and incorporated personalised normative feedback, information provision, and relapse-prevention components. Eligible participants were aged 18 or older, resided in the UK and had scores indicating at least moderate severity gambling.
resultsParticipants (54 [65.1%] male; mean [SD] age = 40.58 [12.75] years, mean [SD] PGSI = 7.16 [5.58]) in the e-SBIRT and control conditions showed improvements in gambling harms (p = 0.033) and perceived ability to control gambling (p = 0.029). No significant effects of condition assignment or condition x time interactions were observed. However, exploratory analyses of individual model coefficients suggested greater improvement in perceived ability to control gambling among participants receiving e-SBIRT at 12 weeks (p = 0.043). Exploratory analyses also suggested higher rates of help-seeking at 12-week follow-up among participants receiving e-SBIRT.
conclusionOverall, e-SBIRT did not demonstrate clear advantages over assessment and information provision alone. Further research should prioritise refining intervention components and evaluating SBIRT approaches in settings that better reflect its opportunistic delivery model.
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.