4.7 Article

Impulsivity in Gambling Disorder and problem gambling: a meta-analysis

Journal

NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
Volume 44, Issue 8, Pages 1354-1361

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-019-0393-9

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust Fellowship [110049/Z/15/Z]
  2. CLAHRC Fellowship East of England (Collaboration in Leadership in Applied Health research and Care)
  3. NIDA
  4. National Center for Responsible Gaming
  5. TLC Foundation for BFRBs
  6. American Foundation for Suicide Prevention
  7. Brainsway
  8. Psyadon Pharmaceuticals
  9. Takeda Pharmaceuticals

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gambling Disorder is a prevalent psychiatric condition often linked to dysfunction of cognitive domains regulating impulsive behavior. Despite the centrality of impulsivity to neurobiological models of Gambling Disorder, a comprehensive meta-analysis of all impulsive cognitive domains has yet to be conducted. It is also not clear whether cognitive deficits in Gambling Disorder extend to those with problem (at-risk) gambling. A systematic review was undertaken of case-control studies examining the following cognitive domains in Gambling Disorder or in at-risk (problem) gambling: attentional inhibition, motor inhibition, discounting, decision-making, and reflection impulsivity. Case-control differences in cognition were identified using meta-analysis (random-effects modeling). Moderation analysis explored potential influences of age, gender, presence/absence of comorbidities in cases, geographical region, and study quality on cognitive performance. Gambling Disorder was associated with significant impairments in motor (g = 0.39-0.48) and attentional (g = 0.55) inhibition, discounting (g = 0.66), and decision-making (g = 0.63) tasks. For problem gambling, only decision-making had sufficient data for meta-analysis, yielding significant impairment versus controls (g = 0.66); however, study quality was relatively low. Insufficient data were available for meta-analysis of reflection impulsivity. There was evidence for significant publication bias only for the discounting domain, after an outlier study was excluded. Study quality overall was reasonable (mean score 71.9% of maximum), but most studies (similar to 85%) did not screen for comorbid impulse control and related disorders. This meta-analysis indicates heightened impulsivity across a range of cognitive domains in Gambling Disorder. Decision-making impulsivity may extend to problem (at-risk) gambling, but further studies are needed to confirm such candidate cognitive vulnerability markers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available