CBT vs control: Diagnoses of pathological gambling ‐ comparisons at 0 to 3 months post‐treatment Lower scores indicate reduced rates of pathological gambling, and thus positive outcomes1
CBT may leads to lower diagnoses of pathological gambling ‐ comparisons at 0 to 3 months… compared with control (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
CBT vs control Diagnoses of pathological gambling ‐ comparisons at 0 to 3 months post‐treatment Lower scores indicate reduced rates of pathological gambling, and thus positive outcomes1 · patients with pathological and problem gambling CBT may leads to lower diagnoses of pathological gambling ‐ comparisons at 0 to 3 months… compared with control (low certainty). Psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling (2012) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.13 [0.05, 0.31] | 2 studies · 81 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Psychological therapies for pathological and problem gambling 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.