4.5 Article

Effectiveness of Available Treatments for Gaming Disorders in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review

期刊

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2021.0067

关键词

gaming disorder; treatment; systematic review; adolescents

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The prevalence of gaming disorder was comparable with obsessive-compulsive disorder, emphasizing the importance of addressing Internet gaming disorder. Treatment interventions for children and adolescents mainly focus on cognitive-behavioral therapy and pharmaceutical intervention, with family support playing a significant role. More studies are needed to explore treatment interventions for children aged 8-12 years old.
In 2020, the prevalence of gaming disorder (GD) was comparable with the prevalence of obsessive-compulsive disorder, thus demonstrating the necessity of addressing Internet gaming disorder (IGD) and GD in general. GD has been introduced as a psychiatric disorder by International Classification of Diseases and paving the way for treatment and prevention interventions. In this review, we researched available treatment interventions in children and adolescents. tau he initial search resulted in 972 studies and we ended up with 16 by excluding inappropriate studies according to six inclusion criteria. The studies confirmed that cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) or CBT-based interventions are the most used, and in cases of comorbidity, such as depression or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, the appropriate pharmaceutical intervention also was an effective option. Other interventions combined CBT with family therapy or CBT-based therapies that took place in specialized camps. Family as a supportive expedient or even treatment expedient seemed to play a major role. It is remarkable that only little knowledge exists regarding treatment interventions for children aged 8-12 years old. Therefore, more studies need to be carried out for this age range especially, with comparable efficacy to this of other interventions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据