CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 51Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders

Pathological gambling: Understanding relapses and dropouts

Open access
Aragay, Núria, Jiménez-Murcia, Susana, Granero, Roser, Fernández-Aranda, Fernando, Ramos-Grille, Irene, Cardona, Sara, Garrido, Gemma, Anisul Islam, Mohammed +2 more·2015·Comprehensive Psychiatry
DOI 10.1016/j.comppsych.2014.10.009
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

There is little available information on the factors that influence relapses and dropouts during therapy for pathological gambling (PG). The aim of this study was to determine socio-demographic, clinical, personality, and psychopathological predictors of relapse and dropout in a sample of pathological gamblers seeking treatment. A total of 566 consecutive outpatients diagnosed with PG according to DSM-IV-TR criteria were included. All patients underwent an individualized cognitive-behavioral treatment program. We analyzed predictors of relapse during 6months of treatment and during the subsequent 6months of follow-up, and predictors of dropout over the entire therapeutic program. Eighty patients (14.1%) experienced at least one relapse during the entire follow-up of the study: 50 (8.8%) within the treatment period and 12 (2.1%) during the subsequent 6-month follow-up period. The main predictors of relapse were single marital status, spending less than 100euros/week on gambling, active gambling behavior at treatment inclusion, and high scores on the TCI-R Harm Avoidance personality dimension. One hundred fifty-seven patients (27.8%) missed 3 or more therapeutic sessions over the entire therapeutic program. The main predictors of dropout were single marital status, younger age, and high scores on the TCI-R Novelty Seeking personality dimension. The presence of these factors at inclusion should be taken into account by physicians dealing with PG patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.comppsych.2014.10.009

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Two studies found that higher levels of gambling behaviours at pre-treatment were associated with poor treatment outcomes, whereas Aragay et al. (2015) found that those who spent smaller amounts gambling per week were associated with a higher risk of relapse.

    “Two studies found that higher levels of gambling behaviours at pre-treatment were associated with poor treatment outcomes, whereas Aragay et al. (2015) found that those who spent smaller amounts gambling per week were associated with a higher risk of relapse.”

    From Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review (2016) · cites this paper as Aragay et al., 2015

  • In the quality assessment, Aragay et al. (2015) had criterion 9 not applicable.

    “| Aragay et al. (2015) | Y | Y | N | Y | NA | NR | NR | NR | NA | Y |”

    From Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review (2016) · cites this paper as Aragay et al. (2015)

    The Methods (section 2.1) describe the study design, and the Discussion (section 4) describes its limitations, but neither identifies a quality-assessment criterion 9. Searches for quality assessment and applicability found no passage establishing that criterion 9 was not applicable; the table entry is the citing authors’ assessment, not a finding reported in this paper. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In the quality assessment, Aragay et al. (2015) did not meet criterion 3.

    “| Aragay et al. (2015) | Y | Y | N | Y | NA | NR | NR | NR | NA | Y |”

    From Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review (2016) · cites this paper as Aragay et al. (2015)

    The paper’s Discussion describes study limitations, including the absence of a control group, but it does not identify the citing document’s quality-assessment criterion 3 or state whether the study meets it. A search for quality-assessment criteria in our copy found no such assessment, so the table’s “N” cannot be verified from this source alone. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In the quality assessment, Aragay et al. (2015) had criteria 6, 7, and 8 not reported.

    “| Aragay et al. (2015) | Y | Y | N | Y | NA | NR | NR | NR | NA | Y |”

    From Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review (2016) · cites this paper as Aragay et al. (2015)

    The paper’s Aims and outcome definitions (section 2.3) and Discussion (section 4) describe the study and its limitations, but do not identify a quality-assessment checklist or its criteria 6–8. I searched for the numbered criteria and reporting-status terms; without knowing what those criteria assess, the citing document’s NR ratings cannot be verified from our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In the quality assessment, Aragay et al. (2015) met criteria 1, 2, 4, and 10.

    “| Aragay et al. (2015) | Y | Y | N | Y | NA | NR | NR | NR | NA | Y |”

    From Predictors of outcomes of psychological treatments for disordered gambling: A systematic review (2016) · cites this paper as Aragay et al. (2015)

    Sections 2.1 (Subjects) and 2.3 (Aims and outcome definitions) describe the study’s recruitment and methods, but they do not define quality-assessment criteria 1, 2, 4, or 10 or report whether the study met them. Searches for a quality checklist and those criterion ratings found no such assessment in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Aragay, N., Jiménez-Murcia, S., Granero, R., Fernández-Aranda, F., Ramos-Grille, I., Cardona, S., Garrido, G., Anisul Islam, M., Menchón, J. M., & Vallès, V.
Affiliations
  • Consorci Sanitari de Terrassa (ES)
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES)
Corresponding author
Aragay, Núria
ORCID
Venue
Comprehensive Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
57
Pages
58-64
ISSN
0010-440X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.comppsych.2014.10.009
OpenAlex
W2091808858
Cited by
51
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
5.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Comprehensive Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Hispana (publishedVersion)
  • Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • UIC Open Acces Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (PSI2011-28349)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Keywords
gambling addiction, relapse, treatment discontinuation, predictors of relapse, predictors of dropout, cognitive behavioral therapy, marital status, gambling expenditure, harm avoidance, novelty seeking, personality traits, medication adherence
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Exploratory Behavior, Female, Gambling, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Dropouts, Personality, Psychopathology, Recurrence, Risk Factors, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

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