Internet-based treatment of gambling problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Background and aims The effect of internet-based psychological treatment for gambling problems has not been previously investigated by meta-analysis. The present study is therefore a quantitative synthesis of studies on the effects of internet-based treatment for gambling problems. Given that effects may vary according to the presence of therapist support and control conditions, it was presumed that subgroup analyses would elucidate such effects. Methods A systematic search with no time constraints was conducted in PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Two authors independently extracted data using a predefined form, including study quality assessment based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Effect sizes were calculated using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was indexed by Cochran’s Q and the I 2 statistics. Publication bias was investigated using trim and fill. Results Thirteen studies were included in the analysis. Random effects models at post-treatment showed significant effects for general gambling symptoms (g = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.43–1.03), gambling frequency (g = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.14–0.45), and amount of money lost gambling (g = 0.19; 95% CI = 0.11–0.27). The corresponding findings at follow-up were g = 1.20 (95% CI = 0.79–1.61), g = 0.36 (95% CI = 0.12–0.60), and g = 0.20 (95% CI = 0.12–0.29) respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that for general gambling symptoms, studies with therapist support yield larger effects than studies without, both post-treatment and at follow-up. Additionally, on general gambling symptoms and gambling frequency, there were lower effect sizes for studies with a control group compared to studies without a control group at follow-up. Studies with higher baseline severity of gambling problems were associated with larger effect sizes at both posttreatment and follow-up than studies with more lenient inclusion criteria concerning gambling problems. Discussion and conclusions Internet-based treatment has the potential to reach a large proportion of persons with gambling problems. Results of the meta-analysis suggest that such treatments hold promise as an effective approach. Future studies are encouraged to examine moderators of treatment outcomes, validate treatment effects cross-culturally, and investigate the effects of novel developments such as ecological momentary interventions.

[1]  David B. Leake,et al.  The association between gambling and financial, social and health outcomes in big financial data , 2021, Nature Human Behaviour.

[2]  M. Griffiths,et al.  The Effects of Responsible Gambling Pop-Up Messages on Gambling Behaviors and Cognitions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2021, Frontiers in Psychiatry.

[3]  D. Jiang,et al.  Examining gambling activity subtypes over time in a large sample of young adults , 2020, Addiction Research & Theory.

[4]  R. Banzi,et al.  The revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) showed low inter-rater reliability and challenges in its application. , 2020, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[5]  Jeremiah Weinstock,et al.  A Randomized Clinical Trial Exploring Gambling Attitudes, Barriers to Treatment, and Efficacy of a Brief Motivational Intervention Among Ex‐Offenders with Disordered Gambling , 2020, Journal of forensic sciences.

[6]  G. Youssef,et al.  GamblingLess: Curb Your Urge: Development and usability testing of a smartphone-delivered ecological momentary intervention for problem gambling , 2020 .

[7]  T. Furukawa,et al.  Unguided Chatbot-Delivered Cognitive Behavioural Intervention for Problem Gamblers Through Messaging App: A Randomised Controlled Trial , 2020, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[8]  D. Hodgins,et al.  Online interventions for problem gamblers with and without co-occurring unhealthy alcohol use: Randomized controlled trial , 2020, Internet interventions.

[9]  R. Soellner,et al.  Web-Based Intervention and Email-Counseling for Problem Gamblers: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial , 2019, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[10]  Natalie S Blencowe,et al.  RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials , 2019, BMJ.

[11]  L. Quilty,et al.  Brief interventions for problem gambling: A meta-analysis , 2019, PloS one.

[12]  D. Hodgins,et al.  Pilot randomized controlled trial of an online intervention for problem gamblers , 2019, Addictive behaviors reports.

[13]  D. Hodgins,et al.  Randomized controlled trial of an Internet intervention for problem gambling provided with or without access to an Internet intervention for co-occurring mental health distress , 2019, Internet interventions.

[14]  S. Moritz,et al.  Cognitive bias modification in problem and pathological gambling using a web-based approach-avoidance task: A pilot trial , 2019, Psychiatry Research.

[15]  D. Hodgins,et al.  Online Self-Directed Interventions for Gambling Disorder: Randomized Controlled Trial , 2019, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[16]  Mary Beth Miller,et al.  A Meta-analysis of Brief Personalized Feedback Interventions for Problematic Gambling , 2019, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[17]  N. Turner,et al.  Internet-Based Interventions for Problem Gambling: Scoping Review , 2019, JMIR mental health.

[18]  F. Matheson,et al.  Prevention and Treatment of Problem Gambling Among Older Adults: A Scoping Review , 2018, Journal of Gambling Issues.

[19]  Seth W. Whiting,et al.  Mindfulness-Based Approaches in the Treatment of Disordered Gambling , 2018 .

[20]  J. Grant,et al.  How to measure monetary losses in gambling disorder? An evidence-based refinement , 2017, Psychiatry Research.

[21]  G. Andersson,et al.  The Development of an Internet-Based Treatment for Problem Gamblers and Concerned Significant Others: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial , 2017, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[22]  S. Bouchard,et al.  Online and Mobile Interventions for Problem Gambling, Alcohol, and Drugs: A Systematic Review , 2017, Front. Psychol..

[23]  S. Hofmann,et al.  Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis , 2017, Journal of behavioral addictions.

[24]  Matthias Briel,et al.  Systematic review finds that study data not published in full text articles have unclear impact on meta-analyses results in medical research , 2017, PloS one.

[25]  L. Hedges,et al.  Basics of meta‐analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity , 2017, Research synthesis methods.

[26]  Bonnie A. Clough,et al.  Internet-Based Delivery of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Compared to Monitoring, Feedback and Support for Problem Gambling: A Randomised Controlled Trial , 2017, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[27]  M. Griffiths,et al.  Self-Reported Losses Versus Actual Losses in Online Gambling: An Empirical Study , 2016, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[28]  Mark D. Griffiths,et al.  Problem gambling worldwide: An update and systematic review of empirical research (2000–2015) , 2016, Journal of behavioral addictions.

[29]  G. Andersson,et al.  Effects of added involvement from concerned significant others in internet-delivered CBT treatments for problem gambling: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial , 2016, BMJ Open.

[30]  C. Browning,et al.  Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review. , 2016, Clinical psychology review.

[31]  M. Griffiths,et al.  Mindfulness as a treatment for gambling disorder: Current directions and issues , 2016 .

[32]  Sally M. Gainsbury,et al.  Internet-Based Interventions for Addictive Behaviours: A Systematic Review , 2016, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[33]  A. Benyamina,et al.  The Efficacy of Three Modalities of Internet-Based Psychotherapy for Non–Treatment-Seeking Online Problem Gamblers: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2016, Journal of medical Internet research.

[34]  Matthew Rockloff,et al.  Understanding gambling related harm: a proposed definition, conceptual framework, and taxonomy of harms , 2015, BMC Public Health.

[35]  B. Hemmelgarn,et al.  The efficacy of motivational interviewing for disordered gambling: systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2015, Addictive behaviors.

[36]  R. Gallop,et al.  Predicting outcome of substance abuse treatment in a feedback study: Can recovery curves be improved upon? , 2015, Psychotherapy research : journal of the Society for Psychotherapy Research.

[37]  G. Andersson,et al.  Advantages and limitations of Internet‐based interventions for common mental disorders , 2014, World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association.

[38]  E. Walker,et al.  Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , 2013 .

[39]  G. Fick,et al.  Internet-based interventions for disordered gamblers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of online self-directed cognitive-behavioural motivational therapy , 2013, BMC Public Health.

[40]  A. Jackson,et al.  Psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[41]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[42]  Alex Blaszczynski,et al.  A systematic review of Internet-based therapy for the treatment of addictions. , 2011, Clinical psychology review.

[43]  J. Higgins,et al.  Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[44]  T. Oei,et al.  A Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Programme for Problem Gambling: Therapist Manual , 2010 .

[45]  Sarah E. Nelson,et al.  Gambling problem symptom patterns and stability across individual and timeframe. , 2009, Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors.

[46]  M. Dimatteo,et al.  A Meta-Analysis , 2009 .

[47]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[48]  D. Hodgins,et al.  Barriers to Seeking Help for Gambling Problems: A Review of the Empirical Literature , 2009, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[49]  P. Carlbring,et al.  Randomized trial of internet-delivered self-help with telephone support for pathological gamblers. , 2008, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[50]  M. Egger,et al.  Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. , 2007, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[51]  Alex H. S. Harris,et al.  Treatment setting and baseline substance use severity interact to predict patients' outcomes. , 2007, Addiction.

[52]  R. Ladouceur,et al.  Overcoming Your Pathological Gambling: Workbook , 2006 .

[53]  Roger M Harbord,et al.  A modified test for small‐study effects in meta‐analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints , 2006, Statistics in medicine.

[54]  N. Petry,et al.  A framework for reporting outcomes in problem gambling treatment research: the Banff, Alberta Consensus. , 2006, Addiction.

[55]  S. Pallesen,et al.  Outcome of psychological treatments of pathological gambling: a review and meta-analysis. , 2005, Addiction.

[56]  Larry V Hedges,et al.  The power of statistical tests for moderators in meta-analysis. , 2004, Psychological methods.

[57]  Kenneth J Sher,et al.  The natural history of problem gambling from age 18 to 29. , 2003, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[58]  M. Griffiths,et al.  Online therapy: Implications for problem gamblers and clinicians1 , 2003 .

[59]  S. Thompson,et al.  Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[60]  S Duval,et al.  Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel‐Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis , 2000, Biometrics.

[61]  N. el-Guebaly,et al.  Natural and treatment-assisted recovery from gambling problems: a comparison of resolved and active gamblers. , 2000, Addiction.

[62]  J. Cutler,et al.  Variance imputation for overviews of clinical trials with continuous response. , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[63]  Mahesh S. Patel An introduction to meta-analysis. , 1989, Health policy.

[64]  B Jennett,et al.  Predicting the Outcome , 1987, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[65]  N. Laird,et al.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials. , 1986, Controlled clinical trials.

[66]  R. Orwin A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis. , 1983 .

[67]  L. Hedges Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect size and Related Estimators , 1981 .

[68]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[69]  H. Lesieur,et al.  The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SaGS): A New Instrument for the Identification of Pathological Gamblers , 2010 .

[70]  Juan Carlos Espinosa,et al.  Comprehensive Meta-Analysis , 2004 .

[71]  W. van den Brink,et al.  Temporal stability of pathological scratchcard gambling among adult scratchcard buyers two years later. , 2004, Addiction.

[72]  R. Ladouceur Controlled Gambling for Pathological Gamblers , 2004, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[73]  Grant Schofield,et al.  Factor Analysis of Barriers to Treatment for Problem Gambling , 2004, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[74]  M. Walker Problems in Measuring the Effectiveness of Cognitive Therapy for Pathological Gambling , 2004, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[75]  A. Sockloff,et al.  Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences: (revised edition), by Jacob Cohen. New York: Academic Press, 1977, xv + 474 pp., $24.50. , 1978 .

[76]  N. Petry,et al.  Psychology Research and Behavior Management Dovepress Psychological Treatments for Gambling Disorder , 2022 .