No Cover Image

Journal article 247 views 44 downloads

Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review

Nyle Hawk Davies Orcid Logo, Gareth Roderique-Davies Orcid Logo, Laura Catherine Drummond Orcid Logo, Jamie Torrance, Klara Sabolova Orcid Logo, Samantha Thomas Orcid Logo, Bev John Orcid Logo

Journal of Public Health, Volume: 31, Issue: 8, Pages: 1259 - 1273

Swansea University Author: Jamie Torrance

  • s10389-021-01678-9.pdf

    PDF | Version of Record

    This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

    Download (2.58MB)

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1007/s10389-021-01678-9

Abstract

Background:While it is a generally accepted fact that many gambling screening tools are not fit for purpose when employed as part of a public health framework, the evidence supporting this claim is sporadic. The aim of this review is to identify and evaluate the gambling screening tools currently in...

Full description

Published in: Journal of Public Health
ISSN: 2198-1833 1613-2238
Published: Springer Science and Business Media LLC 2023
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa65208
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2023-12-04T13:41:21Z
last_indexed 2023-12-04T13:41:21Z
id cronfa65208
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rfc1807 xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>65208</id><entry>2023-12-04</entry><title>Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>de868c4f56d8f5fbecbd686fdbb7b4b5</sid><firstname>Jamie</firstname><surname>Torrance</surname><name>Jamie Torrance</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2023-12-04</date><deptcode>HPS</deptcode><abstract>Background:While it is a generally accepted fact that many gambling screening tools are not fit for purpose when employed as part of a public health framework, the evidence supporting this claim is sporadic. The aim of this review is to identify and evaluate the gambling screening tools currently in use and examine their utility as part of a public health approach to harm reduction, providing a holistic snapshot of the field.Methods:A range of index tests measuring aspects of problem gambling were examined, including the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) and the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), among others. This review also examined a range of reference standards including the Diagnostic Interview for Gambling Severity (DIGS) and screening tools such as the SOGS.Results:The present review supports the belief held by many within the gambling research community that there is a need for a paradigm shift in the way gambling harm is conceptualised and measured, to facilitate early identification and harm prevention.Discussion:This review has identified a number of meaningful deficits regarding the overall quality of the psychometric testing employed when validating gambling screening tools. Primary among these was the lack of a consistent and reliable reference standard within many of the studies. Currently there are very few screening tools discussed in the literature that show good utility in the domain of public health, due to the focus on symptoms rather than risk factors. As such, these tools are generally ill-suited for identifying preclinical or low-risk gamblers.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Journal of Public Health</journal><volume>31</volume><journalNumber>8</journalNumber><paginationStart>1259</paginationStart><paginationEnd>1273</paginationEnd><publisher>Springer Science and Business Media LLC</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>2198-1833</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1613-2238</issnElectronic><keywords/><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>8</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2023</publishedYear><publishedDate>2023-08-01</publishedDate><doi>10.1007/s10389-021-01678-9</doi><url>http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10389-021-01678-9</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Psychology</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>HPS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm>Another institution paid the OA fee</apcterm><funders/><projectreference/><lastEdited>2024-04-05T14:24:39.3197062</lastEdited><Created>2023-12-04T13:39:41.1744871</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Psychology</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Nyle Hawk</firstname><surname>Davies</surname><orcid>0000-0003-0746-3879</orcid><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Gareth</firstname><surname>Roderique-Davies</surname><orcid>0000-0002-6446-749x</orcid><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Laura Catherine</firstname><surname>Drummond</surname><orcid>0000-0002-2990-3153</orcid><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Jamie</firstname><surname>Torrance</surname><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Klara</firstname><surname>Sabolova</surname><orcid>0000-0003-3109-0398</orcid><order>5</order></author><author><firstname>Samantha</firstname><surname>Thomas</surname><orcid>0000-0003-1427-7775</orcid><order>6</order></author><author><firstname>Bev</firstname><surname>John</surname><orcid>0000-0002-5520-2385</orcid><order>7</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>65208__29191__e3f0083ef514428c86a6188f7d0b4893.pdf</filename><originalFilename>s10389-021-01678-9.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2023-12-04T13:41:03.1943383</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>2701479</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Version of Record</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><documentNotes>This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.</documentNotes><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language><licence>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</licence></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling v2 65208 2023-12-04 Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review de868c4f56d8f5fbecbd686fdbb7b4b5 Jamie Torrance Jamie Torrance true false 2023-12-04 HPS Background:While it is a generally accepted fact that many gambling screening tools are not fit for purpose when employed as part of a public health framework, the evidence supporting this claim is sporadic. The aim of this review is to identify and evaluate the gambling screening tools currently in use and examine their utility as part of a public health approach to harm reduction, providing a holistic snapshot of the field.Methods:A range of index tests measuring aspects of problem gambling were examined, including the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) and the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), among others. This review also examined a range of reference standards including the Diagnostic Interview for Gambling Severity (DIGS) and screening tools such as the SOGS.Results:The present review supports the belief held by many within the gambling research community that there is a need for a paradigm shift in the way gambling harm is conceptualised and measured, to facilitate early identification and harm prevention.Discussion:This review has identified a number of meaningful deficits regarding the overall quality of the psychometric testing employed when validating gambling screening tools. Primary among these was the lack of a consistent and reliable reference standard within many of the studies. Currently there are very few screening tools discussed in the literature that show good utility in the domain of public health, due to the focus on symptoms rather than risk factors. As such, these tools are generally ill-suited for identifying preclinical or low-risk gamblers. Journal Article Journal of Public Health 31 8 1259 1273 Springer Science and Business Media LLC 2198-1833 1613-2238 1 8 2023 2023-08-01 10.1007/s10389-021-01678-9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10389-021-01678-9 COLLEGE NANME Psychology COLLEGE CODE HPS Swansea University Another institution paid the OA fee 2024-04-05T14:24:39.3197062 2023-12-04T13:39:41.1744871 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences School of Psychology Nyle Hawk Davies 0000-0003-0746-3879 1 Gareth Roderique-Davies 0000-0002-6446-749x 2 Laura Catherine Drummond 0000-0002-2990-3153 3 Jamie Torrance 4 Klara Sabolova 0000-0003-3109-0398 5 Samantha Thomas 0000-0003-1427-7775 6 Bev John 0000-0002-5520-2385 7 65208__29191__e3f0083ef514428c86a6188f7d0b4893.pdf s10389-021-01678-9.pdf 2023-12-04T13:41:03.1943383 Output 2701479 application/pdf Version of Record true This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. true eng https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
title Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review
spellingShingle Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review
Jamie Torrance
title_short Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review
title_full Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review
title_fullStr Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review
title_sort Accessing the invisible population of low-risk gamblers, issues with screening, testing and theory: a systematic review
author_id_str_mv de868c4f56d8f5fbecbd686fdbb7b4b5
author_id_fullname_str_mv de868c4f56d8f5fbecbd686fdbb7b4b5_***_Jamie Torrance
author Jamie Torrance
author2 Nyle Hawk Davies
Gareth Roderique-Davies
Laura Catherine Drummond
Jamie Torrance
Klara Sabolova
Samantha Thomas
Bev John
format Journal article
container_title Journal of Public Health
container_volume 31
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1259
publishDate 2023
institution Swansea University
issn 2198-1833
1613-2238
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10389-021-01678-9
publisher Springer Science and Business Media LLC
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str School of Psychology{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Psychology
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10389-021-01678-9
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description Background:While it is a generally accepted fact that many gambling screening tools are not fit for purpose when employed as part of a public health framework, the evidence supporting this claim is sporadic. The aim of this review is to identify and evaluate the gambling screening tools currently in use and examine their utility as part of a public health approach to harm reduction, providing a holistic snapshot of the field.Methods:A range of index tests measuring aspects of problem gambling were examined, including the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) and the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), among others. This review also examined a range of reference standards including the Diagnostic Interview for Gambling Severity (DIGS) and screening tools such as the SOGS.Results:The present review supports the belief held by many within the gambling research community that there is a need for a paradigm shift in the way gambling harm is conceptualised and measured, to facilitate early identification and harm prevention.Discussion:This review has identified a number of meaningful deficits regarding the overall quality of the psychometric testing employed when validating gambling screening tools. Primary among these was the lack of a consistent and reliable reference standard within many of the studies. Currently there are very few screening tools discussed in the literature that show good utility in the domain of public health, due to the focus on symptoms rather than risk factors. As such, these tools are generally ill-suited for identifying preclinical or low-risk gamblers.
published_date 2023-08-01T14:24:35Z
_version_ 1795501301017083904
score 11.036706

Similar Items