Treatment for the concerned significant others of gamblers: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Research recognizes the extent of harm experienced by concerned significant others (CSOs) of gamblers. This systematic review's aims are to examine the interventions for CSOs, evaluate potential benefits, and thematically describe treatment processes. The Stress-Strain-Coping-Support model (SSCS) served as the theoretical framework. METHODS: Database searches were conducted in: MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, Web of Science Core Collection, Social Services Abstracts, Applied Social Science Index and Abstracts, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and APA PsycInfo (between 01/Jan 2011-10/Jun 2021). Other search methods were also utilized. Inclusion criteria: interventions for CSOs with CSO specific outcomes. The Evidence Project Risk of Bias Tool was used for assessment. RESULTS: 19/768 records were included. Nine interventions were utilized: 3 CSO directed, 4 for couples, and 2 low threshold online interventions. A quantitative synthesis (N = 7 studies) of effect size estimates for depression and anxiety measures didn't indicate any intervention to have better outcomes than others. Core themes in the treatment process identified in the qualitative synthesis (N = 7) included: information and understanding, social support, coping skills, communication, and strain. Limitations in the evidence related to sampling, control-conditions and outcome measurements. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Several interventions were identified, yet no specific interventions appeared more beneficial than others. Using the SSCS model, commonalities and differences in intervention content were identified, along with themes that influence treatment processes. The need for tailored interventions is discussed. Future treatment efficacy research should carefully select study designs and outcome measurements. PROSPERO (CRD42021229408).

Dimensions of the South Oaks Gambling Screen in Finland: A cross-sectional population study.

The underlying structure of problematic gambling behaviors, such as those assessed by the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS), remain unknown: Can problem gambling be assessed unidimensionally or should multiple qualitatively different dimensions be taken into account, and if so, what do these qualitative dimensions indicate? How significant are the deviations from unidimensionality in practice? A cross-sectional random sample of Finns aged 15-74 (n = 4,484) was drawn from the Population Information Registry and surveyed in 2011-2012. Analyses were conducted using descriptive statistics, Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and multidimensional item response theory (MIRT) models. Altogether, 14.9% of the population endorsed at least one of the 20 SOGS items, but nine items had low endorsement rates (≤ 0.2%). CFA and MIRT techniques suggested that individuals differed from each other in two positively correlated (r = 0.70) underlying dimensions: "impact on self primarily" and "impact on others also". This two-factor correlated-factors model can be reinterpreted as a bifactor model with one general gambling-problem factor and two specific factors with similar interpretation as in the correlated-factors model but with non-overlapping items. The two specific factors may provide clinically useful information without extra costs of assessment.

Reliability of Instruments Measuring At-Risk and Problem Gambling Among Young Individuals: A Systematic Review Covering Years 2009-2015.

This review aims to clarify which instruments measuring at-risk and problem gambling (ARPG) among youth are reliable and valid in light of reported estimates of internal consistency, classification accuracy, and psychometric properties. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, and PsycInfo covering the years 2009-2015. In total, 50 original research articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria: target age under 29 years, using an instrument designed for youth, and reporting a reliability estimate. Articles were evaluated with the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Reliability estimates were reported for five ARPG instruments. Most studies (66%) evaluated the South Oaks Gambling Screen Revised for Adolescents. The Gambling Addictive Behavior Scale for Adolescents was the only novel instrument. In general, the evaluation of instrument reliability was superficial. Despite its rare use, the Canadian Adolescent Gambling Inventory (CAGI) had a strong theoretical and methodological base. The Gambling Addictive Behavior Scale for Adolescents and the CAGI were the only instruments originally developed for youth. All studies, except the CAGI study, were population based. ARPG instruments for youth have not been rigorously evaluated yet. Further research is needed especially concerning instruments designed for clinical use.