National estimates of Australian gambling prevalence: Findings from a dual-frame omnibus survey
Dowling, Nicki A., Youssef, G. J., Jackson, Alun C., Pennay, D. W., Francis, Kate Louise, Pennay, Amy and Lubman, Dan I. 2016. National estimates of Australian gambling prevalence: Findings from a dual-frame omnibus survey. Addiction. 111 (3), pp. 420 - 435. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13176
|Authors||Dowling, Nicki A., Youssef, G. J., Jackson, Alun C., Pennay, D. W., Francis, Kate Louise, Pennay, Amy and Lubman, Dan I.|
Background, aims and design: The increase in mobile telephone-only households may be a source of bias for traditional landline gambling prevalence surveys. Aims were to: (1) identify Australian gambling participation and problem gambling prevalence using a dual-frame (50% landline and 50% mobile telephone) computer-assisted telephone interviewing methodology; (2) explore the predictors of sample frame and telephone status; and (3) explore the degree to which sample frame and telephone status moderate the relationships between respondent characteristics and problem gambling. Setting and participants: A total of 2000 adult respondents residing in Australia were interviewed from March to April 2013. Measurements: Participation in multiple gambling activities and Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI). Findings: Estimates were: gambling participation [63.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 61.4–66.3], problem gambling (0.4%, 95% CI = 0.2–0.8), moderate-risk gambling (1.9%, 95% CI = 1.3–2.6) and low-risk gambling (3.0%, 95% CI = 2.2–4.0). Relative to the landline frame, the mobile frame was more likely to gamble on horse/greyhound races [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4], casino table games (OR = 5.0), sporting events (OR = 2.2), private games (OR = 1.9) and the internet (OR = 6.5); less likely to gamble on lotteries (OR = 0.6); and more likely to gamble on five or more activities (OR = 2.4), display problem gambling (OR = 6.4) and endorse PGSI items (OR = 2.4-6.1). Only casino table gambling (OR = 2.9) and internet gambling (OR = 3.5) independently predicted mobile frame membership. Telephone status (landline frame versus mobile dual users and mobile-only users) displayed similar findings. Finally, sample frame and/or telephone status moderated the relationship between gender, relationship status, health and problem gambling (OR = 2.9–7.6). Conclusion: Given expected future increases in the mobile telephone-only population, best practice in population gambling research should use dual frame sampling methodologies (at least 50% landline and 50% mobile telephone) for telephone interviewing.
|Keywords||cellphones; dual-frame; gambling; mobile telephone; prevalence; problem gambling; sampling; surveys|
|Journal citation||111 (3), pp. 420 - 435|
|Publisher||Blackwell Publishing Ltd|
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI)||https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13176|
|Open access||Open access|
|Page range||420 - 435|
|Research Group||Centre for Health and Social Research|
© 2015 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
|Place of publication||United Kingdom|
0views this month
3downloads this month