OBJECTIVE: Multilevel consequences related to gambling disorder (GD) are glaring enough to make gambling a worldwide public health issue. Dissociation has been pointed out in clinical, empirical, and theoretical contributions as a key variable accounting for the development and maintenance of GD. However, we still lack a systematization of available empirical data that may facilitate further accurate conclusions. METHOD: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed with the goal to answer to open questions. We followed the PRISMA guidelines conducting a systematic search of 5 scientific databases (PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed) including grey literature. RESULTS: A total of 843 records were screened, and 20 studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. A systematic review of selected studies outlines the high heterogeneity in the operationalization of the dissociation construct as well as the absence of studies examining the role played by the specific dimensions of the pathological dissociative feature in GD. A significant, positive, and moderate effect size (r = .37) was found linking GD to dissociation. Moreover, this effect appears to not be moderated by the quality of studies, age, and gender of participants nor measures used to evaluate dissociation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite empirical evidences supporting the theoretical assertions toward the relationship between GD and dissociation, few studies have reached an articulated understanding of this topic, mostly failing to identify specific dissociative features involved in GD. Furthermore, the existence of the current gap in the literature are discussed to delineate future lines of research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: Multilevel consequences related to gambling disorder (GD) are glaring enough to make gambling a worldwide public health issue. Dissociation has been pointed out in clinical, empirical, and theoretical contributions as a key variable accounting for the development and maintenance of GD. However, we still lack a systematization of available empirical data that may facilitate further accurate conclusions. METHOD: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed with the goal to answer to open questions. We followed the PRISMA guidelines conducting a systematic search of 5 scientific databases (PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed) including grey literature. RESULTS: A total of 843 records were screened, and 20 studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. A systematic review of selected studies outlines the high heterogeneity in the operationalization of the dissociation construct as well as the absence of studies examining the role played by the specific dimensions of the pathological dissociative feature in GD. A significant, positive, and moderate effect size (r = .37) was found linking GD to dissociation. Moreover, this effect appears to not be moderated by the quality of studies, age, and gender of participants nor measures used to evaluate dissociation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite empirical evidences supporting the theoretical assertions toward the relationship between GD and dissociation, few studies have reached an articulated understanding of this topic, mostly failing to identify specific dissociative features involved in GD. Furthermore, the existence of the current gap in the literature are discussed to delineate future lines of research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Andy J Kim; W Spencer Murch; Eve H Limbrick-Oldfield; Mario A Ferrari; Kent I MacDonald; Jolande Fooken; Mariya V Cherkasova; Miriam Spering; Luke Clark Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 3.752