A comment on the utility of prevalence estimates of pathological gambling.

The case is presented that researchers interested in policy aimed at treating the pathological gambler need to shift focus to improving the utility of prevalence estimates. It is argued that researchers supplement prevalence estimates with practical and well-defined measures of severity and other predictors and correlates of help-seeking. The dimension of severity is emphasized as one means of providing estimates that are relevant to policy makers when placed in the context of additional measures that improve their meaning and utility. Estimates may then be partitioned along these dimensions to ascertain the proportion of gamblers most likely to need or seek treatment for gambling-related disorders. The recommendations provided are subject to a number of possible objections and are presented in the interest of stimulating further discussion such as the distinction between symptom assessment and the measurement of severity.