MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1023/b:jogs.0000022307.09299.f5

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of gambling studies · 2004

Gambling participation and problems among employees at a university health center.

Petry Nancy M, Mallya Sarita

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

This study evaluated the frequency and intensity of gambling behaviors among employees at an academic health center. Employees were sent an anonymous questionnaire assessing demographic characteristics, participation in gambling activities, and gambling-related problems. Of the 904 respondents, 96% reported gambling in their lifetimes, with 69% gambling in the past year, 40% in the past two months, and 21% in the past week. The most common forms of gambling were lottery and scratch tickets, slot machines, card playing, sports betting, bingo, and track. Only 1.2% of the sample reported gambling on the internet. Using scores on the South Oaks Gambling Screen, 3.0% of the respondents were classified as Level 2 (or problem) gamblers, and an additional 1.8% were Level 3 (or pathological) gamblers. Compared to Level 1 (non-problem) gamblers, Level 2 and Level 3 gamblers were more likely to be male, single, and employed full-time, and to have lower income and education. About half of the Level 2 and Level 3 gamblers reported interest in an evaluation of their gambling behaviors and treatment interventions. These data suggest the need to screen for gambling problems in health care professionals and to provide gambling-specific treatments.

Для цитирования: Petry Nancy M, Mallya Sarita. Gambling participation and problems among employees at a university health center.. Journal of gambling studies. 2004. DOI: 10.1023/b:jogs.0000022307.09299.f5.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.