MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000360672 · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2020.100307

Online interventions for problem gamblers with and without co-occurring unhealthy alcohol use: Randomized controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3000360672 on OpenAlexafffundabout
John Cunningham, David C. Hodgins, Matthew T. Keough, Christian S. Hendershot, Christina Schell, Alexandra Godinho

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Interventions · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionBrief interventionRandomized controlled trialPsychologyAlcoholAlcohol consumptionExcessive alcohol consumptionClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problem gambling and unhealthy alcohol use often co-occur. The current trial sought to establish whether adding a brief online intervention for unhealthy alcohol use to an online problem gambling intervention would lead to improvements in gambling and drinking among those with both of these concerns. Participants were recruited from across Canada using an advertisement targeting those concerned about their gambling who were interested in online help. No mention of unhealthy alcohol use was made in the advertisement. Participants meeting criteria for problem gambling were randomized to either receive just an online intervention for gambling (G-only) or to receive an online gambling intervention plus a brief personalized feedback intervention for unhealthy alcohol use (G + A). Participants were followed up at 3 and 6 months. A total of 282 participants were recruited for the trial. Follow-up rates were good (80% and 84% at 3 and 6 months). There were significant reductions in gambling (p < .001) across time but no significant differences (p > .05) between those who received either the G-only or G + A interventions. Further, for those with unhealthy alcohol use (41% of the sample), there were no significant reductions in alcohol consumption (p > .05) across time or differences between condition. The addition of a brief intervention for unhealthy alcohol use to an online intervention for gambling did not appear to improve either gambling or drinking outcomes among people concerned about their gambling. Further research is merited to examine whether a combined intervention (with gambling and drinking components integrated) might result in improved outcomes and whether such an intervention might benefit the subgroup of participants who would specifically seek help for both gambling and alcohol concerns. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03323606; Registration date: October 24, 2017.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.283
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternet InterventionsSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207