+1 Recommend
2 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Problematic online gambling among adolescents: A systematic review about prevalence and related measurement issues


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Background and aims

          Despite its illegality among adolescents, online gambling is a common practice, which puts their mental health and well-being at serious risk. This systematic review summarises international scientific literature from the last 20 years on problematic online gambling among adolescents (11–21 years old) to determine its prevalence and to analyse related measurement issues.


          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and a protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, IC: CRD42020162932). Five academic databases were consulted, which resulted in an initial sample of 658 papers.


          Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. All studies were cross-sectional and targeted students from elementary school, secondary school or university. Most followed a convenience sampling procedure. The primary measurement instruments used were the DSM-IV-MR-J and SOGS-RA. Between 0.77% and 57.5% of adolescents present some degree of problematic online gambling (problem, pathological or disordered) depending on the instruments used, the study samples and the timeframe analysed. Between 0.89% and 1% of adolescents exhibited an online gambling disorder.

          Discussion and conclusion

          There is a great heterogeneity in the methodology of the reviewed studies (samples, measurement instruments, cut-off points and criteria applied). The limited number of studies and the limited generalizability of their results suggest the need for further research and for development of specific instruments to assess different levels of problematic online gambling in representative samples of adolescents based on clinical ‘gold standard’ criteria and more accurate cut-off points.

          Related collections

          Most cited references81

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed

            Objective To develop ROBIS, a new tool for assessing the risk of bias in systematic reviews (rather than in primary studies). Study Design and Setting We used four-stage approach to develop ROBIS: define the scope, review the evidence base, hold a face-to-face meeting, and refine the tool through piloting. Results ROBIS is currently aimed at four broad categories of reviews mainly within health care settings: interventions, diagnosis, prognosis, and etiology. The target audience of ROBIS is primarily guideline developers, authors of overviews of systematic reviews (“reviews of reviews”), and review authors who might want to assess or avoid risk of bias in their reviews. The tool is completed in three phases: (1) assess relevance (optional), (2) identify concerns with the review process, and (3) judge risk of bias. Phase 2 covers four domains through which bias may be introduced into a systematic review: study eligibility criteria; identification and selection of studies; data collection and study appraisal; and synthesis and findings. Phase 3 assesses the overall risk of bias in the interpretation of review findings and whether this considered limitations identified in any of the phase 2 domains. Signaling questions are included to help judge concerns with the review process (phase 2) and the overall risk of bias in the review (phase 3); these questions flag aspects of review design related to the potential for bias and aim to help assessors judge risk of bias in the review process, results, and conclusions. Conclusions ROBIS is the first rigorously developed tool designed specifically to assess the risk of bias in systematic reviews.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): a new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers


                Author and article information

                J Behav Addict
                J Behav Addict
                Journal of Behavioral Addictions
                Akadémiai Kiadó (Budapest )
                16 September 2021
                October 2021
                October 2021
                : 10
                : 3
                : 566-586
                [1 ] Faculty of Education, Universidad Internacional de La Rioja (UNIR) , Avenida de la Paz, 137, 26006, Logroño, Spain
                [2 ] Faculty of Psychology, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU) , Avenida de Tolosa, 70, 20018, Donostia, Spain
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. E-mail: juanmanuel.machimbarrena@ 123456ehu.eus
                Author information
                © 2021 The Author(s)

                Open Access. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes, provided the original author and source are credited, a link to the CC License is provided, and changes – if any – are indicated.

                : 23 December 2020
                : 30 May 2021
                : 23 July 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 77, Pages: 21

                online gambling,adolescents,disorder,pathological,problem,systematic review


                Comment on this article