Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/124549
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Screening and assessment tools for gaming disorder: a comprehensive systematic review
Author: King, D.
Chamberlain, S.
Carragher, N.
Billieux, J.
Stein, D.
Mueller, K.
Potenza, M.
Rumpf, H.
Saunders, J.
Starcevic, V.
Demetrovics, Z.
Brand, M.
Lee, H.
Spada, M.
Lindenberg, K.
Wu, A.
Lemenager, T.
Pallesen, S.
Achab, S.
Kyrios, M.
et al.
Citation: Clinical Psychology Review, 2020; 77:1-20
Publisher: Elsevier
Issue Date: 2020
ISSN: 0272-7358
1873-7811
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Daniel L. King, Samuel R. Chamberlain, Natacha Carragher, Joel Billieux, Dan Stein, Kai Mueller, Marc N. Potenza, Hans Juergen Rumpf, John Saunders, Vladan Starcevic, Zsolt Demetrovics, Matthias Brand, Hae Kook Lee, Marcantonio Spada, Katajun Lindenberg, Anise M.S. Wu, Tagrid Lemenager, Ståle Pallesen, Sophia Achab, Mike Kyrios, Susumu Higuchi, Naomi A. Fineberg, Paul H. Delfabbro
Abstract: The inclusion of gaming disorder (GD) as an official diagnosis in the ICD-11 was a significant milestone for the field. However, the optimal measurement approaches for GD are currently unclear. This comprehensive systematic review aimed to identify and evaluate all available English-language GD tools and their corresponding evidence. A search of PsychINFO, PsychArticles, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar identified 32 tools employed in 320 studies (N = 462,249 participants). The evaluation framework examined tools in relation to: (1) conceptual and practical considerations; (2) alignment with DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria; (3) type and quantity of studies and samples; and (4) psychometric properties. The evaluation showed that GD instrumentation has proliferated, with 2.5 tools, on average, published annually since 2013. Coverage of DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria was inconsistent, especially for the criterion of continued use despite harm. Tools converge on the importance of screening for impaired control over gaming and functional impairment. Overall, no single tool was found to be clearly superior, but the AICA-Sgaming, GAS-7, IGDT-10, IGDS9-SF, and Lemmens IGD-9 scales had greater evidential support for their psychometric properties. The GD field would benefit from a standard international tool to identify gaming-related harms across the spectrum of maladaptive gaming behaviors.
Keywords: Gaming disorder; behavioral addiction; screening; assessment; ICD-11; DSM-5
Rights: © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).
RMID: 1000016323
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101831
Grant ID: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/DE170101198
Appears in Collections:Psychology publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_124549.pdfPublished Version1.19 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.