MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2668660891 · doi:10.1111/add.13914

A free ride? An analysis of the association of casino bus tours and problem gambling among older adults

2017· article· en· W2668660891 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mark van der Maas, Robert E. Mann, Flora I. Matheson, Nigel E. Turner, Hayley A. Hamilton, John McCready

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoHorizon Health NetworkCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersGambling Research Exchange Ontario
KeywordsDemographyBivariate analysisOddsOdds ratioIncentiveConfidence intervalPsychologyHarmConfoundingLogistic regressionAdvertisingMedicineSocial psychologyStatisticsBusinessEconomicsSociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and aims Little research has examined the relationship between incentives used by gambling venues to attract customers and the experience of gambling‐related harm. Organized and subsidized bus tours are a common example of such incentives. The aim of this study was to examine whether bus‐tour patronage was associated with increased odds of problem gambling among older adults. This study also compared rates of bus‐tour use by socio‐demographic characteristics and gambling behaviours. Design Pearson's χ 2 tests and Mann–Whitney U ‐tests were applied for bivariate analyses. Multivariate generalized mixed‐effects regression modelling was used to examine the relationship between bus‐tour patronage and problem gambling while controlling for possible confounding factors. Setting Seven gambling venues located in Central and Southwestern Ontario, Canada. Participants A total of 1978 gambling venue patrons over the age of 55 years. Measurements Problem gambling as indicated by the Problem Gambling Severity Index, bus‐tour patronage in the 12 months prior to the survey, spending per gambling visit and past‐month slot machine participation. Findings Regression analyses showed that bus‐tour patronage was associated with higher odds of problem gambling [odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, confidence interval (CI) = 1.06, 2.76] after controlling for several demographic characteristics, type of gambling and gambling expenditures. Bivariate analyses showed past‐year bus‐tour patronage was associated with more frequent slot machine play (χ 2 = 48.16, P < 0.001), more past‐year gambling venue visits ( P < 0.001) and lower spending on gambling per casino visit ( P < 0.001). Compared with non‐patrons, bus tour patrons were more likely to be female (χ 2 = 21.92, P < 0.001), born outside Canada (χ 2 = 113.18, P < 0.001), above the age of 75 (χ 2 = 24.02, P < 0.001) and retired (χ 2 = 16.60, P < 0.001). Conclusions When adjusting for potential confounders among older adults, using bus tours to access Canadian gambling venues is associated with increased risk of problem gambling. Bus‐tour patrons are more likely to be female, born outside Canada and above the age of 75 years.

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)0.000
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 score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207