Clear principles are needed for integrity in gambling research

Debate: We need data infrastructure as well as data sharing - conflicts of interest in video game research

Industry data sharing has the potential to revolutionise evidence on video gaming and mental health, as well as a host of other critical topics. However, collaborative data sharing agreements between academics and industry partners may also afford industry enormous power in steering the development of this evidence base. In this paper, we outline how nonfinancial conflicts of interest may emerge when industry share data with academics. We then go on to describe ways in which such conflicts may affect the quality of the evidence base. Finally, we suggest strategies for mitigating this impact and preserving research independence. We focus on the development of data infrastructure: technological, social, and educational architecture that facilitates unfettered and free access to the kinds of high-quality data that industry hold, but without industry involvement.

A public health approach to gambling regulation: countering powerful influences

Often portrayed as a harmless leisure activity in the UK, gambling is being increasingly recognised as a public health concern. However, a gambling policy system that explicitly tackles public health concerns and confronts the dependencies and conflicts of interest that undermine the public good is absent in the UK. Although there is a window of opportunity to change the gambling policy system, with the UK Government's launch of a review of the Gambling Act 2005, the adoption of a comprehensive and meaningful public health approach is not guaranteed. Too often, government policy has employed discourses that align more closely with those of the gambling industry than with those of the individuals, families, and communities affected by the harms of gambling. In view of the well described commercial determinants of health and corporate behaviour, an immense effort will be needed to shift the gambling discourse to protect public health. In this Viewpoint, we seek to advance this agenda by identifying elements that need challenging and stimulating debate.

Expanding on the multidisciplinary stakeholder framework to minimize harms for problematic risk-taking involving emerging technologies. •

As new types of problematic behaviors and new forms of online risk-taking emerge, forming collaborative relationships while understanding complexities of motivations may help to promote harm reduction and intervention. While it may be too early to form a stakeholder framework without first conceptually understanding the problematic behaviors involved, we attempt to build upon a proposed multidisciplinary stakeholder framework to minimize harms for problematic risk-taking involving emerging technologies. We propose an expansion of roles for individual stakeholders and an expansion of proposed roles for family stakeholders to include partner/spouses, others living in the household, and/or those with close relationships with individuals who are experiencing problems. Empowering individuals who use emerging technologies through participatory action research and knowledge translation/dissemination may lead to improvements in the quality of research and a greater impact on policy and practice. Also, we discuss benefits of industry self-regulation and collaboration on data-sharing practices. We recommend approaches to promote global collaboration with a larger group of relevant stakeholders (including but not limited to individual consumers of technology, families, communities, treatment and welfare providers, researchers, industries, and governments) to address protection of vulnerable populations and reduce harms for users of rapidly advancing technologies.

Mechanisms for addressing and managing the influence of corporations on public health policy, research and practice: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

We identified mechanisms for addressing and/or managing the influence of corporations on public health policy, research and practice, as well as examples of where these mechanisms have been adopted from across the globe.

DESIGN

We conducted a scoping review. We conducted searches in five databases on 4 June 2019. Twenty-eight relevant institutions and networks were contacted to identify additional mechanisms and examples. In addition, we identified mechanisms and examples from our collective experience working on the influence of corporations on public health policy, research and practice.

SETTING

We identified mechanisms at the national, regional and global levels.

RESULTS

Thirty-one documents were included in our review. Eight were peer-reviewed scientific articles. Nine discussed mechanisms to address and/or manage the influence of different types of industries; while other documents targeted specific industries. In total, we identified 49 mechanisms for addressing and/or managing the influence of corporations on public health policy, research and practice, and 43 of these were adopted at the national, regional or global level. We identified four main types of mechanisms: transparency; management of interactions with industry and of conflicts of interest; identification, monitoring and education about the practices of corporations and associated risks to public health; prohibition of interactions with industry. Mechanisms for governments (n=17) and academia (n=13) were most frequently identified, with fewer for the media and civil society.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several mechanisms that could help address and/or manage the negative influence of corporations on public health policy, research and practice. If adopted and evaluated more widely, many of the mechanisms described in this manuscript could contribute to efforts to prevent and control non-communicable diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS

The protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework on 27 May 2019 (https://osf.io/xc2vp).

A public health advocacy approach for preventing and reducing gambling related harm

OBJECTIVE

To develop a framework to guide the application of public health advocacy strategies aimed at preventing and reducing gambling-related harm.

METHODS

A narrative review of theories of change and public health advocacy literature.

RESULTS

An eight-step public health advocacy framework was created, which outlines the critical steps and considerations when developing and implementing successful change efforts. Implications for public health: To date, a clear public health advocacy approach to gambling harm prevention and reduction has not been well established. This study proposes a gambling-specific framework to guide future public health advocacy efforts to prevent and reduce gambling harm.

Gambling Research and Industry Funding

This paper discusses the relationship between investigative credibility and the sources of funding associated with gambling research. Some researchers argue against accepting funding from gambling industry sources; similarly, they decline to participate in activities directly or indirectly sponsored by gambling industry sources. In contrast, these anti-industry investigators evidence less resistance toward accepting funds from sources other than industry, for example, governments, because they believe that they have greater independence, reliability, and validity, and less undue influence and/or interference. We organize this article, around six primary issues: (1) researchers making a priori judgments that restrict positions towards industry associated research; (2) the potential negative impacts of holding such a position; (3) a description of the different sources of funding available to support gambling-related research; (4) an examination of the extant empirical support associated with the sources of funding and whether such support evidences bias; (5) a description of six cases illustrating how refusing to participate in any project funded by the industry can adversely influence the advancement of science and, at times, be itself unethical; and finally, (6) we suggest some remedies to advance solutions to this problem by stimulating the participation of reluctant researchers to work towards a greater harmony, keeping in mind that the pivotal goal of our work is to increase our knowledge in different area of science and to harness it to public goods.

Design and outcome measures for the AB InBev Global Smart Drinking Goals evaluation

We describe the rationale for and design of an independent evaluation of the Global Smart Drinking Goals (GSDG) program. The primary purpose of this program, supported by the AB InBev Foundation, is to reduce harms associated with alcohol use by 10%. Our evaluation focuses on the effects of prevention strategies sponsored by the Foundation that are being implemented in six city pilots located in as many countries. These strategies are designed to reduce heavy episodic drinking, underage drinking, drink driving, and alcohol-related violence. Each city pilot has been matched with a comparison city in which the GSDG program will not be implemented. In this quasi-experimental community trial, we will assess each city pilot's progress toward reaching its harm reduction goals, relative to its comparison city, by means of annual adult and youth surveys. We will then supplement these analyses with the use of pertinent local archival data, where available. We discuss several challenges related to this evaluation and its quasi-experimental design. These include operating in a fluid and unpredictable environment in regard to the implementation, adaptation, and (on occasion) abandonment of the prevention strategies selected by each city pilot. We also discuss issues concerning our decision to accept funding from the alcohol industry and the measures we have taken to ensure the independence of our evaluation.

Responsible Gambling Research and Industry Funding Biases

This brief report examines whether there are differences in aspects of different characteristics, including design/methodologies of responsible gambling (RG), between studies funded by industry as compared to other sources. To investigate this, the authors used those studies included in a recent meta-analysis focusing on the empirical basis of RG initiatives (Ladouceur et al. in Addict Res Theory 25:225-235, 2017). We examined eight associations between funding sources, and different design/methodological characteristics of these studies; type of strategy, inclusion of comparison groups, measurement scales and repeated measures, publication source, number of inclusion criteria met, secondary sources of funding, publication year. The results revealed no statistically significant difference between the funding source, and the index study characteristics. These results do not support claims that funding exerts influence on the design or methodologies of RG studies. However, the absence of statistically significant findings should not be used to assert the absence of a funding effect because there are many reasons for failing to find differences, or interpretation of findings. Unexpectedly, a third of the papers included in this study failed to disclose their funding sources. This finding highlights the need for more open and transparent disclosures.

Gambling Research and Funding Biases

A recent systematic review of the responsible gambling research suggests that there are no significant differences between gambling industry and non-industry funded research with regard to research design and outcomes. This study empirically synthesizes the outcomes of a larger sample of the scientific gambling literature to determine the generalizability of these original results. Our goal was to determine the extent to which funding sources might differentially influence characteristics of research design and outcomes. We conducted a comprehensive review of 18 research databases and examined studies published between January 2008 and August 2018. For four gambling-related journals, we reviewed all of the available studies. For 14 addiction-related journals, we examined only studies that examined gambling-related outcomes. To be included in this study, publications had to be quantitative and include a clear gambling-related hypothesis. After retrieving 1731 gambling studies, we applied the inclusion criteria and retained 720 studies for our final analytic sample. We used hypothesis confirmation and funding source information to determine the presence or absence of funding bias. Gambling industry funded studies were no more likely than studies not funded by the gambling industry to report either confirmed, partially confirmed, or rejected hypotheses. Nonetheless, studies funded by the gambling industry were more likely than other types of funding sources to include a conflict of interest statement. Studies with disclosed funding sources were more likely than those with undisclosed funding sources to include a conflict of interest statement. These findings highlight the importance of transparency and disclosure during research dissemination.

Effects of prevention and harm reduction interventions on gambling behaviours and gambling related harm: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Harms related to gambling have been found not only to affect problem gamblers, but also to occur amongst low- and moderate-risk gamblers. This has resulted in calls for a public health approach to address a possible 'prevention paradox' in gambling related harm. The aim of this study was to evaluate the systematic review evidence base on the effects of prevention and harm reduction interventions on gambling behaviours, and gambling related harm. We also aimed to examine differential effects of interventions across socio-demographic groups.

METHODS

Systematic methods were used to locate and evaluate published systematic reviews of prevention and harm reduction interventions. We designed the review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Equity extension Guidelines. Four databases were searched from their start date until May 2018. The quality of the included articles was determined using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2).

RESULTS

Ten systematic reviews were identified reporting 55 unique relevant primary studies. Much of the review evidence-base related to pre-commitment and limit setting (24%), self-exclusion (20%), youth prevention programmes (20%), and machine messages/feedback (20%). The effectiveness of harm reduction interventions are limited by the extent to which users adhere to voluntary systems. Less than half of studies examining youth prevention programmes demonstrated positive effects on behaviour. No review extracted data or reported on the differential effects of intervention strategies across sociodemographic groups. The quality of the included reviews (and their primary studies) were generally poor and clear gaps in the evidence base have been highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base is dominated by evaluations of individual-level harm reduction interventions, with a paucity of research on supply reduction interventions. Review conclusions are limited by the quality and robustness of the primary research. Future research should consider the equity effects of intervention strategies.

Research in the field of gambling disorders funded by gambling providers: lessons to learn fromthe pharmaceutical industry?

Abstract. Introduction: The importance of research funding for potential conflicts of interests has been widely discussed in the field of substance-related disorders: research funding by industries producing alcohol, tobacco or drugs as well as by pharmaceutical companies contains a substantial risk of publication bias, conflicts of health care authorities as well as researchers and opinion leaders in the field of addiction research and medicine. Disclosure of all conflicts of interest is an indispensable consequence in every case. Extent of financial support, fields of sponsoring and publication bias are presented. Due to parallels between funding in substance related research and research on pathological gambling and the industrial interest in research of pathological gambling interferences as common in the research of other substances have to be considered as problematic. Discussion and Conclusion: We need (1) evaluation of the potential conflicts of interest on the part of state organizations (2) limitation of advertising and indirect sponsoring, (3) disclosure of any financial and non-financial relationship and, in particular, the scope of a financial relationship between universities, research institutes, study leaders, authors, reviewers and responsible editors of research journals on the gambling providers, (4) a rating system that quantifies a potential publication bias, (5) an exclusion of persons with significant sponsorship in the past five years from responsible functions with regard to the field of gambling, and (6) a pool of public funds for research funding managed by an independent body.

Industry interests in gambling research: Lessons learned from other forms of hazardous consumption

Research indicates that the evidential bases for many harm reduction policies targeting hazardous consumptions (including tobacco, alcohol and gambling) have been distorted by commercial industries that derive revenue from such commodities. These distortions are best illustrated by research on tobacco and alcohol, which indicates similar tactics used by industries to determine favourable policy environments through engineering of evidence, among other approaches. Although there is concern that gambling research is similarly vulnerable to commercial interests, the relevant literature lags far behind other fields and the aim of this paper is to increase familiarity with tactics used by industries for influencing research. It summarises the conceptual and empirical bases for expecting conflicts between goals of public health and companies that profit from hazardous consumptions. It also summarises evidence describing practices deployed by tobacco corporations, which include third-party techniques and the selective funding of research to manufacture doubt and deflect attention away from the consequences of smoking. It then reviews both early and emerging evidence indicating similar strategies used by alcohol industry, and uses this literature to view practices of the gambling industry. It argues that parallels regarding selective funding of research and third-party techniques provide grounds for strong concern about commercial influences on gambling research, and implementation of precautionary approaches to management of vested interests.

A case for clean conferences in gambling research

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Gambling research is characterised by widespread gambling industry involvement. It is likely (as with alcohol and tobacco industry influence) that this will delay or divert effective harm prevention or minimisation measures. Gambling harms are known to be significant and widespread. Effective action to reduce these harms requires concomitant efforts to eliminate industry influence.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Gambling industry influence and activity in three research forums is described. The influence of tobacco and alcohol industry involvement in research directions and outcomes is discussed. Aspects of the discursive elements of industry funded and/or directed research outputs are analysed in the context of industry-friendly discourse and its effects. Industry activity and participation at representative research forums is outlined.

RESULTS

The examples and background provided demonstrate that specific material and discursive effects of gambling industry involvement can be discerned in the gambling literature. The consequences of this for the gambling evidence base around harm prevention and minimisation are presented.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Industry influence operates at multiple levels within the gambling research field. There is increasing awareness of this, and of the effects it may have on the development and deployment of effective harm prevention and minimisation efforts. Key reforms are proposed: (i) the elimination of industry participation and sponsorship of gambling research associations and forums; and (ii) the establishment where necessary of new research forums and international scholarly associations.

Neuroscience in gambling policy and treatment: an interdisciplinary perspective

Neuroscientific explanations of gambling disorder can help people make sense of their experiences and guide the development of psychosocial interventions. However, the societal perceptions and implications of these explanations are not always clear or helpful. Two workshops in 2013 and 2014 brought together multidisciplinary researchers aiming to improve the clinical and policy-related effects of neuroscience research on gambling. The workshops revealed that neuroscience can be used to improve identification of the dangers of products used in gambling. Additionally, there was optimism associated with the diagnostic and prognostic uses of neuroscience in problem gambling and the provision of novel tools (eg, virtual reality) to assess the effectiveness of new policy interventions before their implementation. Other messages from these workshops were that neuroscientific models of decision making could provide a strong rationale for precommitment strategies and that interdisciplinary collaborations are needed to reduce the harms of gambling.