Suppr超能文献

赌博类型参与的系统评估:赌博障碍识别测试(GDIT)的信度和效度

Systematic Assessment of Gambling Type Involvement: Reliability and Validity of the Gambling Disorder Identification Test (GDIT).

作者信息

Wall Håkan, Wennberg Peter, Binde Per, Molander Olof

机构信息

Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Norra Stationsgatan 69, Plan 7, Solna, Stockholm, 113 64, Sweden.

Stockholm Region Health Services, Stockholm, Sweden.

出版信息

J Gambl Stud. 2025 Mar;41(1):219-232. doi: 10.1007/s10899-024-10345-z. Epub 2024 Aug 2.

Abstract

Gambling type involvement, both in terms of participation (engagement in specific gambling types) and diversity (how many gambling types an individual engages in), is a key feature to address in gambling self-report measures, but such systematic measurement procedures are scarce. The aim of this study was to test the psychometric performance of the gambling type assessment in the recently developed Gambling Disorder Identification Test (GDIT), in terms of test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and patterns of gambling diversity, among help-seeking and general population gambling samples (total n = 603). Overall, online gambling was more commonly reported as problematic than land-based gambling. Retest reliability varied for specific gambling types (ICC range 0.32-0.64, r range 0.66-0.85). In terms of gambling participation, online gambling showed stronger correlations with GDIT total score (i.e., symptom severity) than land-based gambling, where Slots showed the strongest correlation (r = 0.52), followed by Casino table games (r = 0.25), Sports and Horse betting (r = 0.16 and r = 0.14, respectively), and Poker (r = 0.14). Lotteries showed no correlation with GDIT total score (r=-0,01). For Slots gambling, all gambling diversity levels (including Slots as a single gambling type) were on average associated with the highest diagnostic severity level (GDIT total score > 30; severe gambling disorder). Finally, explorative configural frequency analysis identified typical and antitypical gambling diversity patterns. The result from the current study corroborates findings that engagement in specific gambling types matter, and that such features should be included in gambling measurement. We conclude that the GDIT is a reliable and valid measure for systematic assessment of gambling type involvement. The GDIT can be used to assess gambling participation and diversity, as part of a broad measurement setup for problem gambling and gambling disorder.

摘要

赌博类型的参与情况,无论是在参与度(参与特定赌博类型的情况)还是多样性(个人参与的赌博类型数量)方面,都是赌博自我报告测量中需要解决的关键特征,但此类系统测量程序很少见。本研究的目的是在寻求帮助的人群和普通人群赌博样本(总计n = 603)中,从重测信度、收敛效度和赌博多样性模式方面,测试最近开发的赌博障碍识别测试(GDIT)中赌博类型评估的心理测量性能。总体而言,与基于陆地的赌博相比,在线赌博被报告为有问题的情况更为常见。特定赌博类型的重测信度各不相同(组内相关系数范围为0.32 - 0.64,相关系数范围为0.66 - 0.85)。在赌博参与方面,在线赌博与GDIT总分(即症状严重程度)的相关性比基于陆地的赌博更强,其中老虎机显示出最强的相关性(r = 0.52),其次是赌场桌游(r = 0.25)、体育和赛马投注(分别为r = 0.16和r = 0.14)以及扑克(r = 0.14)。彩票与GDIT总分无相关性(r = -0.01)。对于老虎机赌博,所有赌博多样性水平(包括仅将老虎机作为一种赌博类型)平均与最高诊断严重程度水平(GDIT总分> 30;严重赌博障碍)相关。最后,探索性构型频率分析确定了典型和非典型的赌博多样性模式。当前研究的结果证实了这样的发现,即参与特定赌博类型很重要,并且此类特征应纳入赌博测量中。我们得出结论,GDIT是系统评估赌博类型参与情况的可靠且有效的测量工具。GDIT可用于评估赌博参与和多样性,作为问题赌博和赌博障碍广泛测量设置的一部分。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/036b/11861517/7053f7851716/10899_2024_10345_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验