Assessing Randomised Clinical Trials of Cognitive and Exposure Therapies for Gambling Disorders: A Systematic Review

被引:11
|
作者
Smith, David P. [1 ]
Dunn, Kirsten I. [1 ]
Harvey, Peter W. [1 ]
Battersby, Malcolm W. [1 ]
Pols, Rene G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Flinders Univ S Australia, Dept Psychiat, Flinders Human Behav & Hlth Res Unit, Adelaide, SA 2001, Australia
关键词
gambling disorders; cognitive therapy; exposure therapy; randomised clinical trial; CONSORT statement; BEHAVIORAL TREATMENT; IMAGINAL DESENSITIZATION; CONSORT STATEMENT; PREVALENCE; EFFICACY; EXTENSION;
D O I
10.1017/bec.2013.15
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Aims: Problem or pathological gambling is associated with significant disruption to the individual, family and community with a range of adverse outcomes, including legal, financial and mental health impairment. It occurs more frequently in younger populations, and comorbid conditions are common. Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is the most empirically established class of treatments for problematic gambling. This article reports on a systematic review and evaluation of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) concerning two core techniques of CBT: cognitive and behavioural (exposure-based) therapies. Methods: PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane library were searched from database inception to December 2012. The CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) for non-pharmacological treatments was used to evaluate each study. Results: The initial search identified 104 references. After two screening phases, seven RCTs evaluating either cognitive (n = 3), exposure (n = 3) or both (n = 1) interventions remained. The studies were published between 1983 and 2003 and conducted across Australia, Canada, and Spain. On average, approximately 31% of CONSORT items were rated as 'absent' for each study and more than 52% rated as 'present with some limitations'. For all Studies, 70.83% of items rated as 'absent' were in the methods section. Conclusions: The findings from this review of randomised clinical trials involving cognitive and exposure-based treatments for gambling disorders show that the current evidence base is limited. Trials with low risk of bias are needed to be reported before recommendations are given on their effectiveness and clinicians can appraise their potential utility with confidence.
引用
收藏
页码:139 / 158
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Anthroposophical medicine: A systematic review of randomised clinical trials - Reply
    Ernst, E
    WIENER KLINISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT, 2004, 116 (11-12) : 408 - 408
  • [32] Treatment of Cognitive Deficits in Genetic Disorders A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials of Diet and Drug Treatments
    van der Vaart, Thijs
    Overwater, Iris E.
    Oostenbrink, Rianne
    Moll, Henriette A.
    Elgersma, Ype
    JAMA NEUROLOGY, 2015, 72 (09) : 1052 - 1060
  • [33] Saffron for mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials
    Ayati, Zahra
    Yang, Guoyan
    Ayati, Mohammad Hossein
    Emami, Seyed Ahmad
    Chang, Dennis
    BMC COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE AND THERAPIES, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [34] Saffron for mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials
    Zahra Ayati
    Guoyan Yang
    Mohammad Hossein Ayati
    Seyed Ahmad Emami
    Dennis Chang
    BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, 20
  • [35] ImpRess: an Implementation Readiness checklist developed using a systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing cognitive stimulation for dementia
    Streater, Amy
    Spector, Aimee
    Aguirre, Elisa
    Stansfeld, Jacki
    Orrell, Martin
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2016, 16
  • [36] ImpRess: an Implementation Readiness checklist developed using a systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing cognitive stimulation for dementia
    Amy Streater
    Aimee Spector
    Elisa Aguirre
    Jacki Stansfeld
    Martin Orrell
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16
  • [37] Anesthesia and cognitive disorders: a systematic review of the clinical evidence
    Bilotta, Federico
    Qeva, Ega
    Matot, Idit
    EXPERT REVIEW OF NEUROTHERAPEUTICS, 2016, 16 (11) : 1311 - 1320
  • [38] A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
    Healy, Aoife
    Farmer, Sybil
    Pandyan, Anand
    Chockalingam, Nachiappan
    PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (03):
  • [39] Fesoterodine in randomised clinical trials: an updated systematic clinical review of efficacy and safety
    Dell'Utri, Chiara
    Digesu, G. Alessandro
    Bhide, Alka
    Khullar, Vik
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2012, 23 (10) : 1337 - 1344
  • [40] Fesoterodine in randomised clinical trials: an updated systematic clinical review of efficacy and safety
    Chiara Dell’Utri
    G. Alessandro Digesu
    Alka Bhide
    Vik Khullar
    International Urogynecology Journal, 2012, 23 : 1337 - 1344