4.5 Article

Prevalence of gaming disorder: A meta-analysis

期刊

ADDICTIVE BEHAVIORS
卷 126, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.107183

关键词

Gaming addiction; Gaming disorder; Internet gaming disorder; Prevalence; Meta-analysis; ICD-11

资金

  1. Project Investigating Scientific Evidence for Registering Gaming Disorder on Korean Standard Classification of Disease and Cause of Death - Ministry of Health and Welfare of Korea
  2. Korea Creative Content Agency
  3. Ministry of Education of the Republic of the Korea
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2017S1A5B6053101]
  5. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017S1A5B6053101] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This meta-analytic study quantifies the global prevalence of gaming disorder (GD) and explores various moderating variables. The study finds high heterogeneity in GD prevalence rates, influenced by participant characteristics and research methodologies. Prevalence estimates are likely to vary depending on study quality. Further epidemiological studies using rigorous methodological standards are needed to accurately estimate GD prevalence.
Background: Gaming disorder (GD) has been listed in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision. Studies on GD prevalence have been highly heterogeneous, and there are significant gaps in prevalence estimates. Few studies have examined what methodological and demographic factors could explain this phenomenon. Therefore, this meta-analytic study quantifies globally reported GD prevalence rates and explores their various moderating variables. Methods: Prevalence estimates were extracted from 61 studies conducted before December 3, 2020, which included 227,665 participants across 29 countries. Subgroup and moderator analyses were used to investigate the potential causes of heterogeneity, including region, sample size, year of data collection, age group, study design, sampling method, survey format, sample type, risk of bias, terminology, assessment tool, and male proportion. Results: The overall pooled prevalence of GD was 3.3% (95% confidence interval: 2.6-4.0) (8.5% in males and 3.5% in females). By selecting only 28 representative sample studies, the prevalence estimate was reduced to 2.4% (95% CI 1.7-3.2), and the adjusted prevalence estimate using the trim-and-fill method was 1.4% (95% CI 0.9-1.9). High heterogeneity in GD prevalence rates was influenced by various moderators, such as participant variables (e.g., region, sample size, and age) and study methodology (e.g., study design, sampling method, sample type, terminology, and instrument). The moderator analyses revealed that the sample size, mean age, and study quality were negatively associated with GD prevalence. Conclusions: This study confirms that GD prevalence studies were highly heterogeneous based on participant demographics and research methodologies. Various confounding variables, such as sampling methods, sample types, assessment tools, age, region, and cultural factors have significantly influenced the GD prevalence rates. Prevalence estimates are likely to vary depending on study quality. Further epidemiological studies should be conducted using rigorous methodological standards to more accurately estimate GD prevalence.

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