Search

Background: Discussions of gambling have traditionally focused on ideas of “problem” and “responsible” gambling. However, few studies have examined how Institutions attempt to exert social control over gamblers in order to promote so-called “responsible” behaviour. In this study, we examine the way “problem” and “responsible” gambling are discussed by Australian governments and the gambling industry, using a theoretical framework based on the work of Foucault.Method: We conducted a thematic analysis of discourses surrounding problem and responsible gambling in government and gambling industry websites, television campaigns and responsible gambling materials.Results: Documents distinguished between gambling, which was positive for the community, and problem gambling, which was portrayed as harmful and requiring medical intervention. The need for responsible gambling was emphasised in many of the documents, and reinforced by mechanisms including self-monitoring, self-control and surveillance of gamblers.Conclusions: Government and industry expect gamblers to behave “responsibly”, and are heavily influenced by neoliberal ideas of rational, controlled subjects in their conceptualisation of what constitutes “responsible behaviour”. As a consequence, problem gamblers become constructed as a deviant group. This may have significant consequences for problem gamblers, such as the creation of stigma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous research has shown that government and industry discussions of gambling may focus on personal responsibility for gambling harm. In Australia, these discussions have largely excluded people with lived experience of problem gambling, including those involved in peer support and advocacy. Methods: We conducted 26 in-depth interviews with people with current or previous problem gambling on electronic gaming machines (EGMs) involved in peer support and advocacy activities, using an approach informed by Interpretive Policy Analysis and Constructivist Grounded Theory. Results: Participants perceived that government and industry discussed gambling as safe and entertaining with a focus on personal responsibility for problem gambling. This focus on personal responsibility was perceived to increase stigma associated with problem gambling. In contrast, they described gambling as risky, addictive and harmful, with problem gambling resulting from the design of EGMs. As a result of their different perspectives, participants proposed different interventions to reduce gambling harm, including reducing accessibility and making products safer. Conclusions: Challenging the discourses used by governments and industry to describe gambling, using the lived experience of people with experience of gambling harm, may result in reduced stigma associated with problem gambling, and more effective public policy approaches to reducing harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most people with dementia live in the community, not in residential care. Therefore, quality informal care for them is critical for managing behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). Music therapy has been shown to reduce BPSD. However, no randomised controlled trial has examined the effects of music interventions delivered by caregivers in home settings. The HOME-based caregiver-delivered music intervention for people living with dementia (HOMESIDE) trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a 12-week music intervention in addition to standard care for BPSD. This article describes the statistical analysis plan., Methods and Analysis: HOMESIDE is a large, pragmatic international three-arm parallel-group randomised controlled trial. Dyads (persons with dementia and caregiver) in Australia, Germany, the UK, Poland and Norway were randomised to receive music and standard care, reading and standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome is BPSD (proxy) of the person living with dementia, measured using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Questionnaire (NPI-Q) at 90 and 180 days post-randomisation. Longitudinal analysis will compare NPI-Q severity between music and standard care versus standard care alone. Secondary outcomes include quality of life and depression (both person with dementia and caregiver), cognition (person with dementia only), distress, resilience, competence and caregiver-patient relationship (caregiver only). Treatment effects will be obtained at 90 and 180 days post-randomisation, where applicable. Safety outcomes (adverse events, hospitalisations, deaths) will be summarised., Discussion: This statistical analysis plan provides a detailed methodology for the analysis of HOMESIDE and will improve the validity of the study and reduce the potential for bias., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618001799246. Registered on November 05, 2018., Clinicaltrials: gov NCT03907748. Registered on April 09, 2019., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: To inform public health approaches to problem gambling by examining how the news media covers problem gambling, with a particular focus on the causes, consequences and solutions to problem gambling, and the 'actors' and sources who influence media coverage., Methods: A qualitative content analysis guided by framing theory analysed coverage of problem gambling in Australian newspapers in the period 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012., Results: Solutions to problem gambling were more frequently discussed than causes and consequences. A focus on the responsibility of individuals was preferred to reporting that focused on broader social, ecological, and industry determinants of problem gambling. Reporting was highly politicised, with politicians frequently quoted and political issues frequently discussed. In contrast, the community sector, health professionals and problem gamblers were rarely quoted., Conclusions and Implications: This analysis has revealed the need for a more proactive, coordinated approach to the media by both public health researchers and health groups. The establishment of a gambling-specific coalition to push for evidence-based reform is recommended., (© 2014 Public Health Association of Australia.)