Cited by 58Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: a meta-analysis

Open access
Goslar, Martina, Leibetseder, Max, Muench, Hannah M., Hofmann, Stefan G., Laireiter, Anton-Rupert·2017·Journal of Behavioral Addictions

Abstract

Background and aims In the light of growing traditional and novel forms of gambling, the treatment of disordered gambling is gaining increasing importance and practical relevance. Most studies have examined face-to-face treatments. Although trials implementing self-guided treatments have recently been conducted, these options have not yet been systematically examined. The primary objective of this meta-analysis, therefore, was to analyze the efficacy of all types of psychological face-to-face and self-guided treatments. Methods A multilevel literature search yielded 27 randomized controlled studies totaling 3,879 participants to provide a comprehensive comparative evaluation of the short- and long-term efficacies of face-to-face and self-guided treatments for disordered gambling. Results As expected, the results revealed significantly higher effect sizes for face-to-face treatments (16 studies with Hedges's g ranging from 0.67 to 1.15) as compared with self-guided treatments (11 studies with Hedges's g ranging from 0.12 to 0.30) regarding the reduction of problematic gambling behavior. The intensity of treatment moderated the therapy effect, particularly for self-guided treatments. Discussion and Conclusions The results of this meta-analysis favor face-to-face treatments over self-guided treatments for the reduction of disordered gambling. Although the findings broaden the scope of knowledge about psychological treatment modalities for disordered gambling, further research is needed to identify the reasons for these differences with the goal to optimize the treatment for this disabling condition.

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 · 10.1556/2006.6.2017.034

Cites

111 of 111 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goslar, M., Leibetseder, M., Muench, H. M., Hofmann, S. G., & Laireiter, A.-R.
Affiliations
  • University of Salzburg (AT)
  • Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
  • Boston University (US)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
Corresponding author
Goslar, Martina
Venue
Journal of Behavioral Addictions
Published
2017-06
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
142-162
ISSN
  • 2062-5871 (ISSN-L)
  • 2063-5303
OpenAlex
W2728692853
Cited by
58
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Behavioral Addictions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) (acceptedVersion)
  • OpenBU (Boston University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
gambling addiction, problem gambling treatment, face-to-face treatment, self-guided treatment, psychological intervention, treatment efficacy, treatment intensity, treatment comparison
MeSH terms
Gambling, Humans, Self Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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