Department of Psychology, Saint Louis University.
Tennessee Institute for Gambling Education and Research, University of Memphis.
Psychol Addict Behav. 2024 Sep;38(6):704-715. doi: 10.1037/adb0001024. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
The aim of the current meta-analysis was to examine potential differences in posttreatment effect size estimates for gambling frequency (i.e., the number of days gambled) and gambling expenditure (i.e., the amount of money gambled) when using the gambling timeline followback (G-TLFB) versus other self-report assessments.
Using an open-access meta-analysis database of studies on cognitive behavioral treatment for gambling disorder, 22 studies representing 2,824 participants were identified for inclusion. Hedges's g effect sizes representing posttreatment differences on gambling frequency and expenditure between cognitive behavioral treatment versus inactive and minimal treatment controls were calculated, and mixed-effect subgroup analyses examined the effect sizes for each outcome between studies using the G-TLFB versus other self-report assessments.
Mixed-effect subgroup analyses indicated that the effect size for gambling frequency was significantly lower for studies using the G-TLFB ( = -0.15) than studies using other self-report assessments ( = -0.71). When examining whether the use of the G-TLFB was associated with the posttreatment effect size for gambling frequency in a random-effect metaregression model that controlled for study grant funding status, the use of the G-TLFB was not significantly associated with effect size. The effect size for gambling expenditure was not significantly different between studies using the G-TLFB ( = -0.22) versus studies using other self-report assessments ( = -0.38).
The G-TLFB yields more conservative and precise effect size estimates of posttreatment gambling frequency, but not gambling expenditure, than other self-report assessments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
本次荟萃分析的目的是检验在使用赌博时间线回溯(G-TLFB)与其他自我报告评估时,赌博频率(即赌博天数)和赌博支出(即赌博金额)的治疗后效应大小估计值是否存在潜在差异。
使用赌博障碍认知行为治疗研究的开放获取荟萃分析数据库,确定了 22 项研究,共 2824 名参与者。计算了认知行为治疗与非活动和最小治疗对照组在赌博频率和支出方面治疗后差异的 Hedges's g 效应大小,并进行了混合效应亚组分析,以检查使用 G-TLFB 与其他自我报告评估的每项结果的研究之间的效应大小。
混合效应亚组分析表明,使用 G-TLFB 的研究的赌博频率效应大小显著低于使用其他自我报告评估的研究( = -0.15 对 = -0.71)。当在一个随机效应荟萃回归模型中检查 G-TLFB 的使用是否与治疗后赌博频率的效应大小相关,该模型控制了研究资助状况时,G-TLFB 的使用与效应大小无显著关联。使用 G-TLFB 的研究与使用其他自我报告评估的研究之间的赌博支出效应大小无显著差异( = -0.22 对 = -0.38)。
与其他自我报告评估相比,G-TLFB 产生的治疗后赌博频率的效应大小估计更为保守和准确,但对赌博支出的效应大小则不然。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2024 APA,保留所有权利)。