Abstract
Monitoring the prevalence of problem gambling has become a major issue for regulators and policy-makers in several countries as legalised gambling has expanded. However, there has been considerable debate about the definition of problem gambling and the most appropriate ways of measuring it. This paper presents a comparative evaluation of three problem gambling screens: the Victorian Gambling Screen (VGS), the Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI) and the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS, version 5+). Using methods of concurrent validation, the study is based on a population survey of 8479 adult residents in the state of Victoria, Australia. While finding limitations with all three screens, overall the study found that the CPGI demonstrated the best measurement properties of the three gambling instruments. As well as essential questions about screen validity, the paper discusses issues for future consideration in prevalence studies and the measurement of problem gambling in general populations.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
