Screening and assessment tools for gaming disorder: A comprehensive systematic review

Détails

Ressource 1Télécharger: King_CPR_2020.pdf (1341.24 [Ko])
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
ID Serval
serval:BIB_0D395CED7304
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Titre
Screening and assessment tools for gaming disorder: A comprehensive systematic review
Périodique
Clinical Psychology Review
Auteur⸱e⸱s
King Daniel L., Chamberlain Samuel R., Carragher Natacha, Billieux Joel, Stein Dan, Mueller Kai, Potenza Marc N., Rumpf Hans Juergen, Saunders John, Starcevic Vladan, Demetrovics Zsolt, Brand Matthias, Lee Hae Kook, Spada Marcantonio, Lindenberg Katajun, Wu Anise M.S., Lemenager Tagrid, Pallesen Ståle, Achab Sophia, Kyrios Mike, Higuchi Susumu, Fineberg Naomi A., Delfabbro Paul H.
ISSN
0272-7358
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2020
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
77
Pages
101831
Langue
anglais
Résumé
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.
Mots-clé
Clinical Psychology, Psychiatry and Mental health, Assessment, Gaming Disorder, Gaming Addiction
Pubmed
Open Access
Oui
Création de la notice
10/03/2020 16:42
Dernière modification de la notice
11/03/2020 7:08
Données d'usage