MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2435051143 · doi:10.1037/adb0000088

Thresholds of probable problematic gambling involvement for the German population: Results of the Pathological Gambling and Epidemiology (PAGE) Study.

2015· article· en· W2435051143 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tim Brosowski, Tobias Hayer, Gerhard Meyer, Hans‐Jürgen Rumpf, Ulrich John, Anja Bischof, Christian Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of Addictive Behaviors · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyBehavioral addictionConfoundingImpulse control disorderCIDIGambling disorderGermanPopulationClinical psychologyLogistic regressionLogitPsychiatryAddictionAnxietyPathologicalAnxiety disorderStatisticsMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consumption measures in gambling research may help to establish thresholds of low-risk gambling as 1 part of evidence-based responsible gambling strategies. The aim of this study is to replicate existing Canadian thresholds of probable low-risk gambling (Currie et al., 2006) in a representative dataset of German gambling behavior (Pathological Gambling and Epidemiology [PAGE]; N = 15,023). Receiver-operating characteristic curves applied in a training dataset (60%) extracted robust thresholds of low-risk gambling across 4 nonexclusive definitions of gambling problems (1 + to 4 + Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition [DSM-5] Composite International Diagnostic Interview [CIDI] symptoms), different indicators of gambling involvement (across all game types; form-specific) and different timeframes (lifetime; last year). Logistic regressions applied in a test dataset (40%) to cross-validate the heuristics of probable low-risk gambling incorporated confounding covariates (age, gender, education, migration, and unemployment) and confirmed the strong concurrent validity of the thresholds. Moreover, it was possible to establish robust form-specific thresholds of low-risk gambling (only for gaming machines and poker). Possible implications for early detection of problem gamblers in offline or online environments are discussed. Results substantiate international knowledge about problem gambling prevention and contribute to a German discussion about empirically based guidelines of low-risk gambling.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.347
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.139 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of Addictive BehaviorsSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207