Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Natural and treatment‐assisted recovery from gambling problems: a comparison of resolved and active gamblers

Hodgins, David C., El‐Guebaly, Nady·2000·Addiction
DOI 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2000.95577713.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Aim. An exploratory study was conducted to understand the process of recovery from gambling problems. Design. Media recruitment was used to identify a resolved ( n = 43) and a comparison group of active pathological gamblers (n = 63). Participants. Participants showed evidence of significant problems related to gambling as well as high rates of co‐morbid mood and substance use disorders. The median length of resolution was 14 months with a range of 6 weeks to 20 years. Findings. Resolved gamblers reported a variety of reasons for quitting gambling, related mainly to emotional and financial factors. They did not experience a greater number of precipitating life events compared with active gamblers but did report an increase in positive and a decrease in negative life events in the year after resolution. Both resolved and active gamblers who had relatively more severe problems were more likely to have had treatment or self‐help involvement, whereas those with less severe problems, if resolved, were “naturally recovered”. Conclusions. The results support the need for a continuum of treatment options for problem gamblers and provide helpful information about recovery processes.

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 · 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2000.95577713.x

Cites

2 of 2 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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hodgins, D. C., & El‐Guebaly, N.
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-05
Volume
95
Issue
5
Pages
777-789
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
DOI
10.1046/j.1360-0443.2000.95577713.x
OpenAlex
W2053075568
Cited by
344
References
2
FWCI
12.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.