College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide 5042, Australia.
Southern Adelaide Local Health Network, Adelaide 5000, Australia.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Jul 30;21(8):998. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21080998.
The harms accompanying disordered gambling are well documented. Additionally, there is growing attention to the harms that arise from people who gamble heavily but do not meet the criteria for a gambling disorder. Accordingly, there has been an increasing interest in the effectiveness of consumer protection tools for consumers of gambling products. Subsequently, there is a need to properly evaluate the evidence for their effectiveness. This review aimed to conduct a narrative synthesis of empirical studies to identify gaps, weaknesses, and strengths in the existing evidence for the effectiveness of harm minimisation tools available to people who gamble. This review includes studies published between January 2015 to July 2022 and comprises 55 peer-reviewed studies for final synthesis. Findings reveal that while more research is needed to examine the effectiveness of active and passive consumer protection tools, uptake of tools is low in part because users view them as tools for individuals already experiencing gambling harm as opposed to protective tools for all users. Research is needed to determine effective ways of communicating the value of consumer protection tools for gambling.
赌博障碍带来的危害有案可查。此外,人们越来越关注那些重度赌博但不符合赌博障碍标准的人所带来的危害。因此,人们对赌博产品消费者的保护工具的有效性越来越感兴趣。随后,需要正确评估其有效性的证据。本综述旨在对实证研究进行叙述性综合,以确定现有的针对赌博者的减少伤害工具的有效性的证据中的差距、弱点和优势。本综述包括 2015 年 1 月至 2022 年 7 月期间发表的研究,最终综合了 55 项同行评议研究。研究结果表明,虽然需要更多的研究来检验主动和被动消费者保护工具的有效性,但工具的使用率较低,部分原因是用户认为这些工具是针对已经遭受赌博伤害的个人的工具,而不是针对所有用户的保护工具。需要研究确定有效沟通消费者保护工具对赌博价值的方法。