There is a need for evidence-based guidelines for gamblers who wish to reduce their risk of harm by setting self-directed limits on their gambling. Recognizing this, the Canadian Low-Risk Gambling Guidelines were developed using data from 8 countries to establish the relationship between gambling behaviour and harm. The guidelines include recommended limits on gambling spending as a percentage of income, gambling frequency, and number of types of games played. However, the developers of the LRGG\'s did not include UK data in their analysis. This study analyzes data from Health Survey England to assess the applicability of the Canadian Low-Risk Gambling Guidelines to gamblers in England. Using HSE data from 2016 to 2018, we generated risk curves for the relationship between 2 dimensions of gambling behaviour-frequency of gambling sessions and number of types of games played-and gambling harm. We defined harm as a score of 1 or above on the Problem Gambling Severity Index. HSE does not include questions on gambling spending, therefore this was not assessed. The relationship observed between frequency and types of gambling and harm among HSE respondents was similar to the risk curves generated for the development of the Canadian LRGG\'s. Gamblers in England who gambled twice weekly or more, or who played 3 or more types of games, were significantly more likely to experience harm from gambling than those who gambled below these limits. The Canadian LRGG\'s may potentially be applied to gambling harm reduction efforts in England. More research is needed to determine the acceptability of these guidelines to people who gamble in England.

There is increasing public health concern about harmful gambling, but no consensus on effective policies and interventions to reduce risk and prevent harm has been reached. Focusing on policies and interventions (ie, measures), the aim of this study was to determine if expert consensus could be reached on measures perceived to be effective that could be implemented successfully. Our work involved a pre-registered, three-round, independent Delphi panel consensus study and an implementation rating exercise. A starting set of 103 universal and targeted measures, which were sourced from several key resources and inputs from public health stakeholders, were grouped into seven domains: price and taxation; availability; accessibility; marketing, advertising, promotion, and sponsorship; environment and technology; information and education; and treatment and support. Across three rounds, an independent panel of 35 experts individually completed online questionnaires to rank each measure for known or potential effectiveness. A consensus was reached if at least 70% of the panel judged a measure to be either not effective, moderately effective, or highly effective. Then, each measure that reached a consensus for effectiveness was evaluated on four implementation dimensions: practicability, affordability, side-effects, and equity. A summative threshold criterion was used to select a final optimal set of measures for England. The panel reached consensus on 83 (81%) of 103 measures. Two measures were judged as ineffective by the panel. The remaining 81 effective measures were drawn from all domains (14 of 15 measures in the the marketing, advertising, promotion, and sponsorship domain were judged as effective, whereas five of ten measures in the information and education domain were judged as effective). During the evaluation exercise, the 81 measures were assessed for likelihood of implementation success. This assessment considered the practicality, affordability, ability to generate unanticipated side-effects, and ability to decrease differences between advantaged and disadvantaged groups in society of each measure. We identified 40 universal and targeted measures to tackle harmful gambling (three measures from the price and taxation domain; ten from the availability domain; five from the accessibility domain; six from the marketing, advertising, promotion, and sponsorship domain; eight from the environment and technology domain; three from the information and education domain; and five from the treatment and support domain). Implementation of these measures in England could substantially strengthen regulatory controls while providing new resources. The findings of our work offer a blueprint for a public health approach to preventing harms related to gambling.

Diverse instruments are used to measure problem gambling and Gambling Disorder intervention outcomes. The 2004 Banff consensus agreement proposed necessary features for reporting gambling treatment efficacy. To address the challenge of including these features in a single instrument, a process was initiated to develop the Gambling Disorder Identification Test (GDIT), as an instrument analogous to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Drug Use Disorders Identification Test.
Gambling experts from 10 countries participated in an international two-round Delphi (n = 61; n = 30), rating 30 items proposed for inclusion in the GDIT. Gambling researchers and clinicians from several countries participated in three consensus meetings (n = 10; n = 4; n = 3). User feedback was obtained from individuals with experience of problem gambling (n = 12) and from treatment-seekers with Gambling Disorder (n = 8).
Ten items fulfilled Delphi consensus criteria for inclusion in the GDIT (M ≥ 7 on a scale of 1-9 in the second round). Item-related issues were addressed, and four more items were added to conform to the Banff agreement recommendations, yielding a final draft version of the GDIT with 14 items in three domains: gambling behavior, gambling symptoms and negative consequences.
This study established preliminary construct and face validity for the GDIT.

BACKGROUND: Kahneman and Tversky\'s prospect theory has become the main model for the study of decision-making. One of its cornerstones, the loss aversion bias (greater sensitivity to losses than to gains), has been demonstrated from the behavioural perspective.
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the evidence from neuroeconomics and check whether it is consistent with the existence of a neural mechanism of loss aversion.
METHODS: A systematic review was performed, following the PRISMA guidelines, of the empirical studies found in PubMed and ScienceDirect, a total of 18 studies being included altogether.
CONCLUSIONS: The results consistently point to the implication of two opposing neural systems in this bias: one appetitive, involving the striatum and the frontal regions, and one aversive, involving the amygdala and the insula, which interact with each other when it comes to making a decision about different monetary bets and display a higher sensitivity towards losses. Although their functioning is not yet clear, what does seem evident is that the consistent involvement of these structures lends support to prospect theory and the limited rationality approach.
BACKGROUND: Bases neurales de la aversion a las perdidas en contextos economicos: revision sistematica segun las directrices PRISMA.
Introduccion. La teoria prospectiva de Kahneman y Tversky se ha convertido en el modelo principal para el estudio de la toma de decisiones. Uno de sus pilares, el sesgo de aversion a las perdidas (mayor sensibilidad a las perdidas que a las ganancias), se ha evidenciado desde el punto de vista conductual. Objetivo. Analizar las evidencias aportadas desde la neuroeconomia y comprobar si son consistentes con la existencia de un mecanismo neural de aversion a las perdidas. Pacientes y metodos. Se ha llevado a cabo una revision sistematica siguiendo las directrices PRISMA de los estudios empiricos encontrados en PubMed y ScienceDirect, incluyendo un total de 18 estudios. Resultados y conclusiones. Los resultados señalan consistentemente la implicacion en este sesgo de dos sistemas neurales opuestos: uno apetitivo, que involucra al estriado y a las regiones frontales, y uno aversivo, que involucra a la amigdala y a la insula, que interactuan entre ellos a la hora de tomar una decision en diferentes apuestas monetarias y muestran una mayor sensibilidad hacia las perdidas. Si bien todavia no esta claro su funcionamiento, lo que si parece evidente es que la consistente implicacion de estas estructuras constituye un apoyo a la teoria prospectiva y al enfoque de racionalidad limitada.

From a public health perspective, gambling shares many of the same characteristics as alcohol. Notably, excessive gambling is associated with many physical and emotional health harms, including depression, suicidal ideation, substance use and addiction and greater utilization of health care resources. Gambling also demonstrates a similar \'dose-response\' relationship as alcohol-the more one gambles, the greater the likelihood of harm. Using the same collaborative, evidence-informed approach that produced Canada\'s Low-Risk Alcohol Drinking and Lower Risk Cannabis Use Guidelines, a research team is leading the development of the first national Low-Risk Gambling Guidelines (LRGGs) that will include quantitative thresholds for safe gambling. This paper describes the research methodology and the decision-making process for the project. The guidelines will be derived through secondary analyses of several large population datasets from Canada and other countries, including both cross-sectional and longitudinal data on over 50 000 adults. A scientific committee will pool the results and put forward recommendations for LRGGs to a nationally representative, multi-agency advisory committee for endorsement. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic attempt to generate a workable set of LRGGs from population data. Once validated, the guidelines inform public health policy and prevention initiatives and will be disseminated to addiction professionals, policy makers, regulators, communication experts and the gambling industry. The availability of the LRGGs will help the general public make well-informed decisions about their gambling activities and reduce the harms associated with gambling.

BACKGROUND: Gambling is an enjoyable recreational pursuit for many people. However, for some it can lead to significant harms. The Delphi expert consensus method was used to develop guidelines for how a concerned family member, friend or member of the public can recognise the signs of gambling problems and support a person to change their gambling.
METHODS: A systematic review of websites, books and journal articles was conducted to develop a questionnaire containing items about the knowledge, skills and actions needed for supporting a person with gambling problems. These items were rated over three rounds by two international expert panels comprising people with a lived experience of gambling problems and professionals who treat people with gambling problems or research gambling problems.
RESULTS: A total of 66 experts (34 with lived experience and 32 professionals) rated 412 helping statements according to whether they thought the statements should be included in these guidelines. There were 234 helping statements that were endorsed by at least 80 % of members of both of the expert panels. These endorsed statements were used to develop the guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: Two groups of experts were able to reach substantial consensus on how someone can recognise the signs of gambling problems and support a person to change.

暂无摘要。

Problem gambling represents a significant public health problem, however, research on effective gambling harm-minimisation measures lags behind other fields, including other addictive disorders. In recognition of the need for consistency between international jurisdictions and the importance of basing policy on empirical evidence, international conventions exist for policy on alcohol, tobacco, and illegal substances. This paper examines the evidence of best practice policies to provide recommendations for international guidelines for harm-minimisation policy for gambling, including specific consideration of the specific requirements for policies on Internet gambling. Evidence indicates that many of the public health policies implemented for addictive substances can be adapted to address gambling-related harms. Specifically, a minimum legal age of at least 18 for gambling participation, licensing of gambling venues and activities with responsible gambling and consumer protection strategies mandated, and brief interventions should be available for those at-risk for and experiencing gambling-related problems. However, there is mixed evidence on the effectiveness of limits on opening hours and gambling venue density and increased taxation to minimise harms. Given increases in trade globalisation and particularly the global nature of Internet gambling, it is recommended that jurisdictions take actions to harmonise gambling public health policies.

暂无摘要。

The Ministry of Health (MOH) has published clinical practice guidelines on Management of Gambling Disorders to provide doctors and patients in Singapore with evidence-based guidance on the management of gambling disorders. This article reproduces the introduction and executive summary (with recommendations from the guidelines) from the MOH clinical practice guidelines on Management of Gambling Disorders for the information of readers of the Singapore Medical Journal. Chapters and page numbers mentioned in the reproduced extract refer to the full text of the guidelines, which are available from the Ministry of Health website (http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/publications.aspx?id=26136). The recommendations should be used with reference to the full text of the guidelines. Following this article are multiple choice questions based on the full text of the guidelines.