The prevention paradox applies to some but not all gambling harms: Results from a Finnish population-representative survey.
gambling harms
population survey
prevention paradox
problem gambling
Journal
Journal of behavioral addictions
ISSN: 2063-5303
Titre abrégé: J Behav Addict
Pays: Hungary
ID NLM: 101602037
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
07
02
2020
revised:
01
04
2020
accepted:
22
04
2020
pubmed:
10
7
2020
medline:
3
6
2021
entrez:
10
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The Prevention Paradox (PP) suggests that a large proportion of aggregate harm from gambling occurs to people who do not have a gambling disorder. However, it has not yet been tested using a population-representative sample. We aimed to test whether the PP applies to gambling in Finland. The prevalence rates of diverse harmful consequences from gambling were surveyed amongst a population-representative sample of past-year gamblers. The study used first wave data (N = 7,186) of Finnish Gambling Harms survey, collected via online and postal surveys in 2017. A subset of 3,795 adults (≥18 years), who had gambled at least monthly in 2016, were selected for analysis. Gambling-related harms were evaluated with the 72-item Harms Checklist. Problem and Pathological Gambling Measure (PPGM) measured respondents' probable disordered gambling from the subset of items for impaired control (4 questions) and other issues (3 questions). Consistent with previous findings, the majority of harms were reported by those in the less severe PPGM categories (i.e. scoring <5). However, considering each domain separately, this was true only for financial, emotional/psychological, and work/study harms. The PP was not supported for health, relationship, or social deviance harms. The population prevalence of the most serious harms (e.g. unsafe living conditions) is concentrated among those with severe impaired control issues. However, even excluding the ∼15% of harms occurring to occasional gamblers, most financial, emotional and work/study impacts occur to those with lower levels of control issues. Efforts at harm reduction should focus on the entire spectrum of issues that people experience from their gambling.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
OBJECTIVE
The Prevention Paradox (PP) suggests that a large proportion of aggregate harm from gambling occurs to people who do not have a gambling disorder. However, it has not yet been tested using a population-representative sample. We aimed to test whether the PP applies to gambling in Finland. The prevalence rates of diverse harmful consequences from gambling were surveyed amongst a population-representative sample of past-year gamblers.
METHODS
METHODS
The study used first wave data (N = 7,186) of Finnish Gambling Harms survey, collected via online and postal surveys in 2017. A subset of 3,795 adults (≥18 years), who had gambled at least monthly in 2016, were selected for analysis.
MEASUREMENTS
METHODS
Gambling-related harms were evaluated with the 72-item Harms Checklist. Problem and Pathological Gambling Measure (PPGM) measured respondents' probable disordered gambling from the subset of items for impaired control (4 questions) and other issues (3 questions).
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Consistent with previous findings, the majority of harms were reported by those in the less severe PPGM categories (i.e. scoring <5). However, considering each domain separately, this was true only for financial, emotional/psychological, and work/study harms. The PP was not supported for health, relationship, or social deviance harms.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The population prevalence of the most serious harms (e.g. unsafe living conditions) is concentrated among those with severe impaired control issues. However, even excluding the ∼15% of harms occurring to occasional gamblers, most financial, emotional and work/study impacts occur to those with lower levels of control issues. Efforts at harm reduction should focus on the entire spectrum of issues that people experience from their gambling.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32644932
doi: 10.1556/2006.2020.00018
pmc: PMC8939417
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
371-382Références
Br J Addict. 1986 Jun;81(3):353-63
pubmed: 3461846
Addict Behav. 2019 Mar;90:380-388
pubmed: 30529994
J Behav Addict. 2018 Jun 1;7(2):410-422
pubmed: 29788761
Qual Life Res. 2018 Sep;27(9):2361-2371
pubmed: 29777460
Eur J Public Health. 2012 Dec;22(6):899-903
pubmed: 22366386
BMC Public Health. 2016 Jan 27;16:80
pubmed: 26818137
J Behav Addict. 2016 Jun;5(2):204-12
pubmed: 27156382
J Gambl Stud. 2019 Sep;35(3):1015-1034
pubmed: 30701378
J Gambl Stud. 2017 Mar;33(1):223-248
pubmed: 27443306
J Gambl Stud. 2018 Jun;34(2):499-512
pubmed: 28578519
Addiction. 2002 May;97(5):487-99
pubmed: 12033650
J Behav Addict. 2017 Jun 1;6(2):163-167
pubmed: 28425779
Clin Psychol Rev. 2006 Mar;26(2):216-28
pubmed: 16356614
Ann Fam Med. 2005 Jan-Feb;3(1):47-52
pubmed: 15671190
Am J Psychiatry. 1987 Sep;144(9):1184-8
pubmed: 3631315
BMC Public Health. 2019 Oct 22;19(1):1323
pubmed: 31640654
J Gambl Stud. 2019 Sep;35(3):743-755
pubmed: 30879158
Health Promot Int. 2019 Dec 1;34(6):1207-1217
pubmed: 30202889
Harm Reduct J. 2019 Feb 8;16(1):12
pubmed: 30736817
J Behav Addict. 2017 Sep 1;6(3):317-320
pubmed: 28889755
BMJ Open. 2018 Aug 23;8(8):e022129
pubmed: 30139904
Nordisk Alkohol Nark. 2018 Jun;35(3):215-234
pubmed: 32934528
Eur J Public Health. 2015 Aug;25(4):716-22
pubmed: 25505020