CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsDigital Mental Health InterventionsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

GAMBLINGLESS: for LIFE study protocol: a pragmatic randomised trial of an online cognitive-behavioural programme for disordered gambling

Open access
Merkouris, S S, Rodda, S N, Austin, D, Lubman, D I, Harvey, P, Battersby, M, Cunningham, J, Lavis, T +2 more·2017·BMJ Open
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014226PMC PMC5337748
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of disordered gambling worldwide has been estimated at 2.3%. Only a small minority of disordered gamblers seek specialist face-to-face treatment, and so a need for alternative treatment delivery models that capitalise on advances in communication technology, and use self-directed activity that can complement existing services has been identified. As such, the primary aim of this study is to evaluate an online self-directed cognitive-behavioural programme for disordered gambling (GamblingLess: For Life). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be a 2-arm, parallel group, pragmatic randomised trial. Participants will be randomly allocated to a pure self-directed (PSD) or guided self-directed (GSD) intervention. Participants in both groups will be asked to work through the 4 modules of the GamblingLess programme over 8 weeks. Participants in the GSD intervention will also receive weekly emails of guidance and support from a gambling counsellor. A total of 200 participants will be recruited. Participants will be eligible if they reside in Australia, are aged 18 years and over, have access to the internet, have adequate knowledge of the English language, are seeking help for their own gambling problems and are willing to take part in the intervention and associated assessments. Assessments will be conducted at preintervention, and at 2, 3 and 12 months from preintervention. The primary outcome is gambling severity, assessed using the Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale. Secondary outcomes include gambling frequency, gambling expenditure, psychological distress, quality of life and additional help-seeking. Qualitative interviews will also be conducted with a subsample of participants and the Guides (counsellors). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Deakin University Human Research and Eastern Health Human Research Ethics Committees. Findings will be disseminated via report, peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12615000864527; results.

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 · 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014226

Cites

84 of 84 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?

  • The study's sample size was determined a priori by a power calculation assuming a moderate interaction effect (f = 0.25), 5% significance, 95% power, and pre-post correlation 0.5, requiring 54 participants, then increased to 134 to allow for 60% attrition.

    “Assuming an effect size of moderate magnitude (f = 0.25), (Cohen, 1988) a significance level of 5%, a statistical power of 95%, and a correlation between pre-treatment and post-treatment measures of 0.5, a total of 54 participants are needed.”

    From Efficacy of an internet-based psychological intervention for problem gambling and gambling disorder: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (2021) · cites this paper as Merkouris et al. (2017)

    The Methods > Sample size section gives a different calculation: 100 participants at postintervention to detect Cohen’s d = 0.55 with 80% power at p < 0.05, increased to 200 for anticipated 50% dropout. It does not give 54 participants, 95% power, or an increase to 134 for 60% attrition. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    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

1 of the 85 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [5]Delfabbro P A review of Australian Gambling Research. Gambling Research Australia, 2008.
  2. [57]Power MJ Development of a common instrument for quality of life. In: Nosikov A, Gudex C, eds. Developing common instruments for health surveys. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2003: 145– 63.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Merkouris, S. S., Rodda, S. N., Austin, D., Lubman, D. I., Harvey, P., Battersby, M., Cunningham, J., Lavis, T., Smith, D., & Dowling, N. A.
Affiliations
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Eastern Health (AU)
  • Flinders University (AU)
  • Australian National University (AU)
Corresponding author
Merkouris, S S
ORCID
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2017-02
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
e014226
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014226
PMC
PMC5337748
OpenAlex
W2589557221
Cited by
21
References
85
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (acceptedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion)
  • Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
gambling addiction, self-guided intervention, gambling severity, psychological distress, quality of life, help-seeking, online therapy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Australia, Female, Gambling, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Research Design, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Logistic Models, Internet, 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