Journal of behavioral addictions · 2026
Updated global prevalence estimates of compulsive buying-shopping disorder: Systematic review and meta-analysis with sex/gender-specific analyses.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Laskowski Nora M, Schaar Patricia, Ballero Reque Cristina, Tetzlaff Bjarn-Ove, Brandt Gerrit, Müller Astrid, Paslakis Georgios
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Reported prevalence for Compulsive Buying-Shopping Disorder (CBSD) remains inconsistent. We updated global CBSD prevalence estimates, including sex/gender comparisons and online manifestations, through a registered systematic review/meta-analysis of studies reporting prevalence in non-clinical samples (PROSPERO CRD42024591568; published 30/09/2024) following PRISMA/MOOSE.
METHODS: PubMed/Scopus/Web of Science were searched (without geographical/temporal restrictions; through 06/2026). Two reviewers independently conducted screening, extraction, risk of bias (RoB) assessment (Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Prevalence Studies). DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models estimated pooled prevalence in representative adult, student/young adult, convenience, adolescent, online buying-shopping samples. Subgroup analyses: year, field, region, assessment, sample size, age, RoB. Evidence certainty followed GRADE.
RESULTS: 111 studies (121 estimates; N = 134,907; 32 countries) were included. Pooled prevalence estimates: 4.6% [3.6%, 5.5%] in representative adult; 9.2% [8.0%, 10.4%] in student/young adult; 10.7% [9.3%, 12.2%]) in convenience; 20.6% in adolescent [10.2%, 31.1%]; 5.9% [4.1%, 7.7%]) in online samples. No sex/gender differences emerged in representative/adolescent/online samples. Women showed higher rates than men in student/young adult/convenience samples. Heterogeneity was high (I2 > 90%). Subgroup findings: significant differences for publication year/region in representative adult; region/assessment/RoB in student/young adult; publication year/sample size in convenience samples; no subgroup differences in adolescent/online samples. Certainty was moderate for representative adult samples, (very) low for all others.
DISCUSSION: Findings underscore the need for diverse, age-adapted, cross-cultural epidemiological research including gender-diverse populations and different consumer environments.
CONCLUSIONS: CBSD is prevalent, particularly among youth. Gender gaps appear limited in binary sex/gender comparisons, evidence for gender minorities remains largely absent.
METHODS: PubMed/Scopus/Web of Science were searched (without geographical/temporal restrictions; through 06/2026). Two reviewers independently conducted screening, extraction, risk of bias (RoB) assessment (Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Prevalence Studies). DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models estimated pooled prevalence in representative adult, student/young adult, convenience, adolescent, online buying-shopping samples. Subgroup analyses: year, field, region, assessment, sample size, age, RoB. Evidence certainty followed GRADE.
RESULTS: 111 studies (121 estimates; N = 134,907; 32 countries) were included. Pooled prevalence estimates: 4.6% [3.6%, 5.5%] in representative adult; 9.2% [8.0%, 10.4%] in student/young adult; 10.7% [9.3%, 12.2%]) in convenience; 20.6% in adolescent [10.2%, 31.1%]; 5.9% [4.1%, 7.7%]) in online samples. No sex/gender differences emerged in representative/adolescent/online samples. Women showed higher rates than men in student/young adult/convenience samples. Heterogeneity was high (I2 > 90%). Subgroup findings: significant differences for publication year/region in representative adult; region/assessment/RoB in student/young adult; publication year/sample size in convenience samples; no subgroup differences in adolescent/online samples. Certainty was moderate for representative adult samples, (very) low for all others.
DISCUSSION: Findings underscore the need for diverse, age-adapted, cross-cultural epidemiological research including gender-diverse populations and different consumer environments.
CONCLUSIONS: CBSD is prevalent, particularly among youth. Gender gaps appear limited in binary sex/gender comparisons, evidence for gender minorities remains largely absent.