Impulsivity in Gambling Disorder and problem gambling: a meta-analysis
Impulsivity in Gambling Disorder and problem gambling: a meta-analysis
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 (~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.
1354-1361
Ioannidis, Konstantinos
82240a24-3153-45bb-bfaf-c6df9cd4f261
Hook, Roxanne
8e06533d-b2ca-4adb-9639-6ee8edafb3b7
Wickham, Katie
913e7a85-c4f1-4ee2-9d8d-11b19acf5a9a
Grant, Jon E.
07372bd5-8a0d-42b4-b41b-e376c652acf3
Chamberlain, Samuel R.
8a0e09e6-f51f-4039-9287-88debe8d8b6f
1 July 2019
Ioannidis, Konstantinos
82240a24-3153-45bb-bfaf-c6df9cd4f261
Hook, Roxanne
8e06533d-b2ca-4adb-9639-6ee8edafb3b7
Wickham, Katie
913e7a85-c4f1-4ee2-9d8d-11b19acf5a9a
Grant, Jon E.
07372bd5-8a0d-42b4-b41b-e376c652acf3
Chamberlain, Samuel R.
8a0e09e6-f51f-4039-9287-88debe8d8b6f
Ioannidis, Konstantinos, Hook, Roxanne, Wickham, Katie, Grant, Jon E. and Chamberlain, Samuel R.
(2019)
Impulsivity in Gambling Disorder and problem gambling: a meta-analysis.
Neuropsychopharmacology, 44 (8), .
(doi:10.1038/s41386-019-0393-9).
Abstract
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 (~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.
Text
s41386-019-0393-9
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 9 April 2019
e-pub ahead of print date: 16 April 2019
Published date: 1 July 2019
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 443457
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/443457
ISSN: 0893-133X
PURE UUID: 70e53c09-8c0d-4d85-b4d8-fa071b14247e
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 26 Aug 2020 16:34
Last modified: 30 Aug 2024 02:00
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Konstantinos Ioannidis
Author:
Roxanne Hook
Author:
Katie Wickham
Author:
Jon E. Grant
Author:
Samuel R. Chamberlain
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics