Cited by 19Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Efficacy of a self-help treatment for at-risk and pathological gamblers

Boudreault, Catherine, Giroux, Isabelle, Jacques, Christian, Goulet, Annie, Simoneau, Hélène, Ladouceur, Robert·2018·Journal of Gambling Studies

Abstract

Available evidence suggests that self-help treatments may reduce problem gambling severity but inconsistencies of results across clinical trials leave the extent of their benefits unclear. Moreover, no self-help treatment has yet been validated within a French Canadian setting. The current study therefore assesses the efficacy of a French language self-help treatment including three motivational telephone interviews spread over an 11-week period and a cognitive-behavioral self-help workbook. At-risk and pathological gamblers were randomly assigned to the treatment group (n = 31) or the waiting list (n = 31). Relative to the waiting list, the treatment group showed a statistically significant reduction in the number of DSM-5 gambling disorder criteria met, gambling habits, and gambling consequences at Week 11. Perceived self-efficacy and life satisfaction also significantly improved after 11 weeks for the treatment group, but not for the waiting list group. At Week 11, 13% of participants had dropped out of the study. All significant changes reported for the treatment group were maintained throughout 1, 6 and 12-month follow-ups. Results support the efficacy of the self-help treatment to reduce problem gambling severity, gambling behaviour and to improve overall functioning among a sample of French Canadian problem gamblers over short, medium and long term. Findings from this study lend support to the appropriateness of self-help treatments for problem gamblers and help clarify inconsistencies found in the literature. The low dropout rate is discussed with respect to the advantages of the self-help format. Clinical and methodological implications of the results are put forth.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10899-017-9717-z

Cites

50 of 50 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boudreault, C., Giroux, I., Jacques, C., Goulet, A., Simoneau, H., & Ladouceur, R.
Affiliations
  • Université Laval (CA)
  • Santé Québec Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal – Universitaire (CA)
Corresponding author
Boudreault, Catherine
Venue
Journal of Gambling Studies
Published
2017-09-13
Volume
34
Issue
2
Pages
561-580
ISSN
  • 1050-5350 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3602
OpenAlex
W2754236387
Cited by
19
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Gambling Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Fonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et Culture (2012-JU-164278)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
problem gambling, gambling addiction, at-risk gamblers, self-help treatment, treatment efficacy, self-efficacy, life satisfaction, dropout, long-term follow-up
MeSH terms
Adult, Canada, Female, Gambling, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Care, Health Behavior, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Behavior, Addictive, Treatment Outcome, Motivational Interviewing

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