Cited by 52Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesMindfulness and Compassion Interventions

Treating problem gambling samples with cognitive behavioural therapy and mindfulness-based interventions: a clinical trial

McIntosh, C. C., Crino, R. D., O’Neill, K.·2016·Journal of Gambling Studies

Abstract

The problem gambling (PG) intervention literature is characterised by a variety of psychological treatments and approaches, with varying levels of evidence (PGRTC in Guideline for screening, assessment and treatment in problem and pathological gambling. Monash University, Melbourne, 2011). A recent PG systematic review (Maynard et al. in Res Soc Work Pract, 2015. doi: 10.1177/1049731515606977 ) and the success of mindfulness-based interventions to effectively treat disorders commonly comorbid with PG suggested mindfulness-based interventions may be effective for treating PG. The current study tested the effectiveness of three interventions to treat PGs: 1. case formulation driven Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT); 2. manualised CBT; and 3. mindfulness-based treatment. All three interventions tested returned large effect size improvements in PG behaviour after seven sessions (Cohen's d range 1.46-2.01), at post-treatment and at 3 and 6-month follow-up. All of the interventions were rated as acceptable by participants at post-treatment. This study suggests that the mindfulness-based and TAU interventions used in the current study appear to be effective at reducing PG behavior and associated distress and they also appear to generalise to improvements in other measures such as quality of life-mental functioning and certain mindfulness facets more effectively than the manualised form of CBT utilised used here. Secondly, a brief mindfulness intervention delivered after psycho-education and a brief CBT intervention may be a useful supplement to traditional CBT treatments by addressing transdiagnostic processes such as rumination and thought suppression. Thirdly, CBT interventions continue to report effectiveness in reducing PG behaviour and associated distress consistent with the prevailing literature and clinical direction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10899-016-9602-1

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 56 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McIntosh, C. C., Crino, R. D., & O’Neill, K.
Affiliations
Charles Sturt University (AU)
Corresponding author
McIntosh, C. C.
Venue
Journal of Gambling Studies
Published
2016-04-04
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
1305-1325
ISSN
  • 1050-5350 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3602
OpenAlex
W2335786009
Cited by
52
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
8.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Gambling Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • New South Wales Government
  • Responsible Gambling Fund
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Keywords
problem gambling, cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based interventions, case formulation, treatment acceptability, transdiagnostic mechanisms, rumination, thought suppression, quality of life, brief psychotherapy
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Aggression, Behavior Therapy, Gambling, Humans, Male, Quality of Life, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Mindfulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review