1School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia.
2Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia.
J Behav Addict. 2021 Mar 31;10(1):21-34. doi: 10.1556/2006.2021.00012.
Problem gambling severity and gambling-related harm are closely coupled, but conceptually distinct, constructs. The primary aim was to compare low-risk gambling limits when gambling-related harm was defined using the negative consequence items of the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI-Harm) and the Short Gambling Harms Scale items (SGHS-Harm). A secondary aim was compare low-risk limits derived using a definition of harm in which at least two harms across different domains (e.g. financial and relationship) were endorsed with a definition of harm in which at least two harms from any domain were endorsed.
Data were collected from dual-frame computer-assisted telephone interviews of 5,000 respondents in the fourth Social and Economic Impact Study (SEIS) of Gambling in Tasmania. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyse were conducted to identify low-risk gambling limits.
PGSI-Harm and SGHS-Harm definitions produced similar overall limits: 30-37 times per year; AUD$510-$544 per year; expenditure comprising no more than 10.2-10.3% of gross personal income; 400-454 minutes per year; and 2 types of gambling activities per year. Acceptable limits (AUC ≥0.70) were identified for horse/dog racing, keno, and sports/other betting using the PGSI definition; and electronic gaming machines, keno, and bingo using the SGHS definition. The requirement that gamblers endorse two or more harms across different domains had a relatively negligible effect.
Although replications using alternative measures of harm are required, previous PGSI-based limits appear to be robust thresholds that have considerable potential utility in the prevention of gambling-related harm.
赌博严重程度和与赌博相关的危害密切相关，但概念上是不同的。主要目的是比较当使用问题赌博严重程度指数（PGSI-Harm）的负后果项目和短期赌博危害量表项目（SGHS-Harm）定义与赌博相关的危害时，低风险赌博限制。次要目的是比较使用以下定义定义的低风险限制：至少有两个来自不同领域（例如财务和关系）的危害得到认可，或者至少有两个来自任何领域的危害得到认可。
数据来自塔斯马尼亚州第四次赌博社会经济影响研究（SEIS）的双框架计算机辅助电话访谈，共对 5000 名受访者进行了调查。进行了接收器操作特征（ROC）曲线分析，以确定低风险赌博限制。
PGSI-Harm 和 SGHS-Harm 定义产生了相似的总体限制：每年 30-37 次；每年 510-544 澳元；支出不超过个人总收入的 10.2-10.3%；每年 400-454 分钟；每年 2 种赌博活动。使用 PGSI 定义，可以识别出赛马/赛狗、基诺和体育/其他投注的可接受限制（AUC≥0.70）；使用 SGHS 定义，可以识别电子游戏机器、基诺和宾果游戏的可接受限制。要求赌徒在不同领域认可两个或更多危害的要求相对微不足道。
虽然需要使用替代危害措施进行复制，但以前基于 PGSI 的限制似乎是稳健的阈值，在预防与赌博相关的危害方面具有相当大的潜在效用。
