![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper presents a critical overview of measures used to assess adult problem gambling in clinical settings and general population research. Particular consideration is given to the challenges in transferring clinically derived measures into population research settings. Numerous screens developed for use in large population surveys as well as in non-specialist clinical settings are described in detail. Overall, the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) and its derivatives continue to be the most widely used measures in most contexts and parts of the world although the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric Disorders—IV) measures and the CPGI (Canadian Problem Gambling Index) are increasingly being used. While these measures are likely to continue in use, there are clear and growing indications that changes are needed to the official diagnosis of pathological gambling rather than to the measures that have been developed to assess gambling problems in population research and clinical settings. However, there is also room for improvement in these measures.
Notes
1. One early exception is the Massachusetts Gambling Screen, each of whose seven items are differentially weighted to produce a final score (Shaffer et al., Citation1994).
2. Recent surveys including the NODS have used a 16-item version. An item assessing whether gambling had caused respondents to experience problems in school was only asked in the original study of individuals who were attending school fulltime. This item has been folded into a subsequent question assessing whether gambling has caused respondents to lose a job, have trouble with a job, or miss out on an important career opportunity.
3. The 9-item PGSI was included as a secondary measure of problem gambling in a recent prevalence survey in New Mexico (Volberg, Citation2006).