A Survey of Medical Student Gambling and Implications for Medical School Educators and Program Development
- 20 Downloads
In the United States, 82% of adults admit to gambling over the past year. Approximately 2.3% of people are considered to be problematic gamblers and 0.6% are considered to have pathological gambling problems. As many as 87% of college students admit to gambling over the past 12 months with up to 9% of men and 2% of women college students considered to be probable pathological gamblers. To date, no studies have been published regarding medical student gambling and its relationship to demographic variables, academics, socializing, and various risk factors. This study surveyed medical students on the prevalence of gambling, gambling behavior, problematic gambling, the relationship between gambling and academic and social issues, and other risky behaviors. Survey results found that 61% of medical students admitted to gambling over the past year. Overall, 13.6% of students who gambled reported at least one symptom or behavior related to problem gambling and less than one percent of students reported pathological gambling. Few students reported that gambling negatively impacted academics or relationships. In general, medical students reported high rates of alcohol use. Implications for medical educators and administration are discussed within the article.
KeywordsMedical students gambling
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Shaffer HJ, and Hall MN. Updating and refining prevalence estimates of disordered gambling behaviour in the United States and Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2001: 92:168–172.Google Scholar
- 5.Center for Research, Evaluation, Assessment and Measurement. Gambling and problem gambling prevalence among college students in Florida. Altamonte Springs, FL: Florida Council on Compulsive Gambling; July 2008.Google Scholar
- 8.Stinchfield R, Hanson WF, and Olson DH. Problem and pathological gambling among college students. In McClellan GS, Hardy TW, and Caswell J. (Eds). Gambling on campus (pp. 63–72). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2006.Google Scholar
- 15.Lesieur HR. Gambling, pathological gambling and crime. In: Galski T. (Ed). The Handbook of Pathological Gambling (pp. 89–110). Springfield, IL: Charles T. Thomas; 1987.Google Scholar
- 18.Kessler RC, Hwang I, LaBrie R, Petukhova M, Sampson NA, Winters KC, and Shaffer HJ. The prevalence and correlates of DSM-IV pathological gambling in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Psychological Medicine. 2008; 38:1351–1360.Google Scholar
- 22.Brown SJ. The surge of online gambling on college campuses. In McClellan GS, Hardy TW, and Caswell J. (Eds). Gambling on campus (pp. 53–61). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2006.Google Scholar
- 23.McClellan GS, and Winters KC. Gambling: An old school new wave challenge for higher education in the twenty-first century. In McClellan GS, Hardy TW, and Caswell J. (Eds). Gambling on campus (pp. 9–23). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2006.Google Scholar
- 24.Lesieur HR, and Blume SB. The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1987; 144:1184–1188.Google Scholar
- 25.Aldrich JH, and Nelson FD. Linear probability, logit, and probit models. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage; 1984.Google Scholar