Prevalence of gambling-related harm provides evidence for the prevention paradox

Abstract

Background: The prevention paradox (PP) describes a situation in which a greater number of cases of a disease-state come from low-risk members of a population, because they are more prevalent than high-risk members. Past research has provided only tangential and disputed evidence to support the application of the PP to gambling-related harm. Aims: To assess whether the PP applies to gambling, the prevalence of a large set (72) of diverse harmful consequences from gambling was examined across four risk categories for problem gambling, including no-risk, low-risk, moderate-risk, and problem-gambling. Methods: Respondents who had gambled on non-lottery forms in the past 6 months completed an online survey (N = 1,524, 49.4% male). The data were weighted to the known prevalence of gambling problems in the Victorian community. Results: The prevalence of gambling harms, including severe harms, was generally higher in the combined categories of lower risk categories compared to the high-risk problem-gambling category. There were some notable exceptions, however, for some severe and rare harms. Nevertheless, the majority of harms in the 72-item list, including serious harms such as needing temporary accommodation, emergency welfare assistance, experiencing separation or end of a relationship, loss of a job, needing to sell personal items, and experiencing domestic violence from gambling, were more commonly associated with lower risk gamblers. Conclusion: Many significant harms are concentrated outside the ranks of gamblers with a severe mental health condition, which supports a public-health approach to ameliorating gambling-related harm.