Comparisons between the South Oaks Gambling Screen and a DSM-IV-Based Interview in a Community Survey of Problem Gambling

Abstract

Objective: To directly compare 2 forms of assessment for determining gambling problems in a community survey, and to examine the characteristics of respondents who endorsed DSM-IV symptoms but who scored below the formal DSM-IV diagnostic cut-off for pathological gambling. Method: We interviewed 1489 Winnipeg adults by phone (response rate 70.5%) using the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS), a DSM-IV-based instrument, and several gambling-related variables. Results: The lifetime prevalence of "probable pathological gambling" (according to the SOGS, having a score of ≥ 5) was 2.6%. The SOGS items and DSM-IV symptoms were highly correlated (r = 0.80), but a score of 5 or more symptoms for a DSM-IV diagnosis produced lower prevalence figures. Comparisons between recreational gamblers (those with no DSM-IV symptoms), subthreshold pathological gamblers (those with 1 to 4 DSM-IV symptoms), and pathological gamblers (those with ≥ 5 DSM-IV symptoms) on a series of gambling-related variables (for example, high use of video lottery terminals) revealed that subthreshold individuals significantly differed from recreational gamblers and more closely approximated the characteristics displayed by pathological gamblers. Conclusions: SOGS items show a high degree of association with the DSM-IV clinical symptoms of pathological gambling, but the DSM-IV cut-off of 5 symptoms is more conservative in defining gambling problems. Results support a continuum view of gambling problems in the community. DSM-IV scores of 3 or 4 represent the higher end of the group officially considered diagnostically "subthreshold" and may be important from both a clinical and public health perspective.