Cited by 24Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesSmoking Behavior and Cessation

The relationship of tobacco use with gambling problem severity and gambling treatment outcome

Odlaug, Brian L., Stinchfield, Randy, Golberstein, Ezra, Grant, Jon E.·2013·Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

This study sought to examine the impact of tobacco use on gambling treatment. Pathological gambling (PG) is a psychiatric condition associated with significant financial, emotional, and psychosocial consequences. Elevated rates of nicotine dependence have been associated with increased gambling severity and more frequent psychiatric problems. A total of 385 treatment-seeking pathological gamblers enrolled in one of 11 gambling treatment providers in Minnesota were assessed. Linear regression modeling was used to examine demographic and clinical variables at treatment entry and the relationship between those variables and the number of days gambled at a 6-month posttreatment. Logistic regression was utilized to assess predictors of treatment completion. Daily tobacco use was reported in 244 (63.4%) subjects. Tobacco users presented with significantly more severe gambling and mental health symptoms at treatment intake. Daily tobacco use, however, was not significantly associated with the number of days gambled or with treatment completion. Although tobacco users present with greater gambling problem severity, they had similar rates of treatment completion and treatment outcomes as nonusers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0029812

Cites

49 of 49 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
Odlaug, B. L., Stinchfield, R., Golberstein, E., & Grant, J. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
Venue
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
Published
2013-09
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
696-704
ISSN
  • 0893-164X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1501
OpenAlex
W2011074994
Cited by
24
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology of Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
tobacco use, nicotine dependence, gambling addiction, gambling severity, treatment completion, psychiatric symptoms, co-occurring substance use
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Gambling, Humans, Disruptive, Impulse Control, and Conduct Disorders, Male, Middle Aged, Minnesota, Patient Compliance, Psychotherapy, Psychotherapy, Group, Severity of Illness Index, Tobacco Use Disorder, Linear Models, Logistic Models, Treatment Outcome

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