CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 247Impact of Technology on AdolescentsGambling Behavior and TreatmentsSexuality, Behavior, and Technology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Treatment of Internet gaming disorder: An international systematic review and CONSORT evaluation

King, Daniel L., Delfabbro, Paul H., Wu, Anise M.S., Doh, Young Yim, Kuss, Daria J., Pallesen, Ståle, Mentzoni, Rune, Carragher, Natacha, Sakuma, Hiroshi·2017·Clinical Psychology Review
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.04.002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Treatment services for Internet gaming disorder are becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide, particularly in East Asia. This international systematic review was designed to appraise the quality standards of the gaming disorder treatment literature, a task previously undertaken by King et al. (2011) prior to the inclusion of Internet gaming disorder in Section III of the DSM-5 and 'Gaming disorder' in the draft ICD-11. The reporting quality of 30 treatment studies conducted from 2007 to 2016 was assessed. Reporting quality was defined according to the 2010 Consolidating Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. The results reaffirmed previous criticisms of these trials, namely: (a) inconsistencies in the definition, diagnosis, and measurement of disordered use; (b) lack of randomization and blinding; (c) lack of controls; and (d) insufficient information on recruitment dates, sample characteristics, and effect sizes. Although cognitive-behavioral therapy has a larger evidence base than other therapies, it remains difficult to make definitive statements on its benefits. Study design quality has not improved over the last decade, indicating a need for greater consistency and standardization in this area. Continuing international efforts to understand the core psychopathology of gaming disorder are vital to developing a model of best practice in treatment.

Overview

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.cpr.2017.04.002

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 68 references

3 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Ge, 2011, P300 change and cognitive behavioral therapy in subjects with Internet addiction disorder: A 3-month follow-up study, Neural Regeneration Research, 6, 2037
  2. Jing, 2010, Effects of cognitive behavioral training on college students with Internet addiction disorder, China Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 855
  3. Wartberg, 2014, Pilot study on the effectiveness of a cognitive behavioural group programme for adolescents with pathological internet use, Praxis der Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie, 63, 21
  4. Wu, 2007, Treatment on 27 adolescents with Internet addiction by 2/100Hz Han's acupoint nerve stimulator (HANS), Chinese Journal of Drug Dependence, 16, 32

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–247 of 247

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
King, D. L., Delfabbro, P. H., Wu, A. M. S., Doh, Y. Y., Kuss, D. J., Pallesen, S., Mentzoni, R., Carragher, N., & Sakuma, H.
Affiliations
  • The University of Adelaide (AU)
  • University of Macau (MO)
  • Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
  • Nottingham Trent University (GB)
  • University of Bergen (NO)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Kurihama Medical and Addiction Center (JP)
Corresponding author
King, Daniel L.
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-06
Volume
54
Pages
123-133
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cpr.2017.04.002
OpenAlex
W2607097979
Cited by
247
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 5
FWCI
6.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Keywords
internet gaming disorder, cognitive behavioral therapy, reporting quality, CONSORT statement, trial design quality, DSM-5, ICD-11, East Asia
MeSH terms
Humans, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Behavior, Addictive, Video Games, Internet

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