English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper takes up the challenge to consider whether it is possible reasonably to overcome a number of sobering methodological deficiencies in published prevalence-rates estimates of ‘problem gambling’. The prompt to do so was the 2006 claim by the Victorian Government to have halved ‘problem gambling’ in the state. The paper shows the claim to be unscientific. It reinforces this view by demonstrating, using evidence and argument from the Productivity Commission, the Australian Bureau of Statistics and statistical/epidemiological sources, that extant sample survey techniques used to estimate prevalence-rates are seriously flawed.

Lies, Damned Lies and ‘Problem Gambling’ Prevalence Rates: The Example of Victoria, Australia