Cargando…
Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis
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 b...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Akadémiai Kiadó
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5520130/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28662618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.034 |
_version_ | 1783251761325146112 |
---|---|
author | Goslar, Martina Leibetseder, Max Muench, Hannah M. Hofmann, Stefan G. Laireiter, Anton-Rupert |
author_facet | Goslar, Martina Leibetseder, Max Muench, Hannah M. Hofmann, Stefan G. Laireiter, Anton-Rupert |
author_sort | Goslar, Martina |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5520130 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Akadémiai Kiadó |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55201302017-08-02 Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis Goslar, Martina Leibetseder, Max Muench, Hannah M. Hofmann, Stefan G. Laireiter, Anton-Rupert J Behav Addict Review Article 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. Akadémiai Kiadó 2017-06-29 2017-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5520130/ /pubmed/28662618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.034 Text en © 2017 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Goslar, Martina Leibetseder, Max Muench, Hannah M. Hofmann, Stefan G. Laireiter, Anton-Rupert Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis |
title | Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis |
title_full | Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis |
title_short | Efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: A meta-analysis |
title_sort | efficacy of face-to-face versus self-guided treatments for disordered gambling: a meta-analysis |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5520130/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28662618 http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.034 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT goslarmartina efficacyoffacetofaceversusselfguidedtreatmentsfordisorderedgamblingametaanalysis AT leibetsedermax efficacyoffacetofaceversusselfguidedtreatmentsfordisorderedgamblingametaanalysis AT muenchhannahm efficacyoffacetofaceversusselfguidedtreatmentsfordisorderedgamblingametaanalysis AT hofmannstefang efficacyoffacetofaceversusselfguidedtreatmentsfordisorderedgamblingametaanalysis AT laireiterantonrupert efficacyoffacetofaceversusselfguidedtreatmentsfordisorderedgamblingametaanalysis |