↓ Skip to main content

How a concerned family member, friend or member of the public can help someone with gambling problems: a Delphi consensus study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How a concerned family member, friend or member of the public can help someone with gambling problems: a Delphi consensus study
Published in
BMC Psychology, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40359-016-0110-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathy S. Bond, Anthony F. Jorm, Helen E. Miller, Simone N. Rodda, Nicola J. Reavley, Claire M. Kelly, Betty A. Kitchener

Abstract

Gambling is an enjoyable recreational pursuit for many people. However, for some it can lead to significant harms. The Delphi expert consensus method was used to develop guidelines for how a concerned family member, friend or member of the public can recognise the signs of gambling problems and support a person to change their gambling. A systematic review of websites, books and journal articles was conducted to develop a questionnaire containing items about the knowledge, skills and actions needed for supporting a person with gambling problems. These items were rated over three rounds by two international expert panels comprising people with a lived experience of gambling problems and professionals who treat people with gambling problems or research gambling problems. A total of 66 experts (34 with lived experience and 32 professionals) rated 412 helping statements according to whether they thought the statements should be included in these guidelines. There were 234 helping statements that were endorsed by at least 80 % of members of both of the expert panels. These endorsed statements were used to develop the guidelines. Two groups of experts were able to reach substantial consensus on how someone can recognise the signs of gambling problems and support a person to change.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 2 5%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 22 54%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 29%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Unspecified 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 22 54%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,579,181
of 21,360,407 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#156
of 652 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,871
of 279,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,360,407 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 652 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,911 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them