Cited by 139Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Randomized trial of brief motivational treatments for pathological gamblers: more is not necessarily better

Hodgins, David C., Currie, Shawn R., Currie, Gillian, Fick, Gordon H.·2009·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

The efficacy of brief treatments for media-recruited pathological gamblers was tested in a randomized clinical trial design (N = 314). Two self-directed motivational interventions were compared with a 6-week waiting list control and a workbook only control. Brief motivational treatment involved a telephone motivational interview and a mailed self-help workbook. Brief motivational booster treatment involved a telephone motivational interview, a workbook, and 6 booster telephone calls over a 9-month period. Primary outcomes were gambling frequency and dollar losses. As hypothesized, brief and brief booster treatment participants reported less gambling at 6 weeks than those assigned to the control groups. Brief and brief booster treatment participants gambled significantly less often over the first 6 months of the follow-up than workbook only participants. However, the workbook only participants were as likely to have significantly reduced their losses over the year and to have not met criteria for pathological gambling. Contrary to the hypothesis, participants in the brief booster treatment group showed no greater improvement than brief treatment participants. These results provide further support for the value of brief motivational treatments for pathological gambling.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0016318

Cites

34 of 34 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
Hodgins, D. C., Currie, S. R., Currie, G., & Fick, G. H.
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2009-10
Volume
77
Issue
5
Pages
950-960
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2156618671
Cited by
139
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
gambling addiction, motivational interview, self-help workbook, telephone-delivered intervention, gambling frequency, gambling losses, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Canada, Combined Modality Therapy, Female, Gambling, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Manuals as Topic, Middle Aged, Motivation, Professional-Patient Relations, Psychotherapy, Brief, Self Care, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Retreatment, Young Adult

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