You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Addiction
Protocol
Experience of LGBTQIA2S+ populations with gambling during the COVID-19 pandemic: protocol for a mixed-methods study
  1. Magaly Brodeur1,
  2. Pasquale Roberge1,
  3. Julie-Christine Cotton2,
  4. Eva Monson2,
  5. Adele Morvannou2,
  6. Marie-Eve Poitras1,
  7. Anaïs Lacasse3,
  8. Didier Jutras-Aswad4,
  9. Yves Couturier5,
  10. Christine Loignon1,
  11. Sophie Audette-Chapdelaine1,
  12. Anne-Marie Auger1,
  13. Karine Bertrand2,
  14. Sabruna Dorceus6,
  15. Olivier Simon7,
  16. Catherine Hudon1
  1. 1 Department of Family Medecine and Emergency Medecine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
  2. 2 Department of Community Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
  3. 3 Department of Health Sciences, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec, Canada
  4. 4 Department of Psychiatry and Addiction, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  5. 5 School of Social Work, Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
  6. 6 Department of Career Counseling, Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
  7. 7 Department of Psychiatry, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland
  1. Correspondence to Magaly Brodeur; magaly.brodeur{at}usherbrooke.ca

Abstract

Introduction Research undertaken since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic has provided us information about the impact of the pandemic on the gambling habits of the general population. However, very little is known about certain subgroups at increased risk of developing gambling disorder, such as the LGBTQIA2S+ population. The purpose of this study is to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gambling behaviours among LGBTQIA2S+ individuals. In addition, we want to understand the experiences of the LGBTQIA2S+ population with gambling disorder and identify interventions that LGBTQIA2S+ people have found to be effective in addressing problem gambling during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods and analysis This study has a sequential explanatory mixed-method design in two phases over 2 years. The first phase is a correlational study. We will conduct a cross-sectional survey using a stratified random sampling among Canadian residents who are 18 years of age or older, self-identify as sexually and gender-diverse (ie, LGBTQIA2S+) and have gambled at least once in the previous 12 months. This survey will be administered online via a web panel (n=1500). The second phase is a qualitative study. Semistructured interviews will be conducted with LGBTQIA2S+ people with problematic gambling (n=30).

Ethics and dissemination This research project has been ethically and scientifically approved by the Research Ethics Committee and by the CIUSSS de l’Estrie—CHUS scientific evaluation committee on 3 March 2022 (reference number: 2022-4633—LGBTQ-JHA). Electronic and/or written informed consent, depending on the data collection format (online survey and online or in-person interviews), will be obtained from each participant. A copy of the consent form and contact information will be delivered to each participant.

  • COVID-19
  • protocols & guidelines
  • mental health
  • public health
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066231

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Strengths and limitations of this study

    • This mixed-methods study will be conducted in two phases: phase 1 will be a cross-sectional correlational study, and phase 2 will be a descriptive qualitative study.

    • Phase 1 data will be collected through an online questionnaire via a stratified random sampling method using a web panel, and phase 2 will use maximum variation sampling.

    • This will be a retrospective study based on self-report data.

    • Participants must self-identify as sexually and gender-diverse (ie, LGBTQIA2S+), have engaged in at least one gambling activity in the past 12 months, be 18 years of age or older, speak English or French and reside in Canada.

    • An advisory committee will ensure that the project is relevant to the needs of the LGBTQIA2S+ population and stakeholders in the field and will ensure integrated knowledge mobilisation.

    Introduction

    Gambling is a major item in population’s consumption habits, both in Canada and abroad.1 In 2018, approximately two-thirds of Canadian adults (66%) had engaged in at least one form of gambling in the previous year.1–3 The most recent Canadian nationally representative survey identified 3.3% of the Canadian population as individuals with at-risk and problem gambling.1 Whereas the majority of people who gamble have low-risk gambling behaviours and do not experience adverse consequences associated with their gambling, others have problematic gambling, that is, that they are at risk of developing gambling disorder (GD) or have a probable GD.2 3 The DSM-5 defines GD as persistent and recurrent gambling behaviour that may result in impaired functioning or significant suffering.4 GD is recognised as a major public health problem in many countries, including Canada.5 6

    The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on the population’s gambling habits. Health measures have resulted in the closure and/or suspension of many gambling facilities (eg, casinos, horse racing), and a shift towards online gambling has been observed.7 Since the beginning of the pandemic, many researchers have expressed concerns about its impact on GD.8 Knowing that GD tends to increase in crisis situations,9–11 they feared an increase in gambling and a shift to online gambling, which present more risk due to its accessibility, speed and anonymity, among other reasons.12–16 During the pandemic, online gambling revenues grew intensively in Canada.17 Online gambling revenue growth increased by 214% in Quebec and 156% in Ontario in 2020–2021.18 19

    Research undertaken since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic has provided information about the impact of the pandemic on the general population’s gambling habits.8 14 20–30 However, very little is known about certain subgroups at increased risk of developing GD, such as the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning/queer, intersex, asexual, and Two-Spirit plus (LGBTQIA2S+) population.31 In Canada, it is estimated that the LGBTQIA2S+ population represents approximately 13% of the population, not including a significant proportion of individuals who will, at some point, question their sexual orientation or gender identity.32 33 LGBTQIA2S+ populations are often stigmatised and experience discrimination, leading to poorer mental health outcomes and unmet needs in the healthcare system compared with heterosexual and cisgendered populations.34 35 Mental disorders, including substance use disorders, are two to four times higher in this population.36 37 This population is also at a higher risk of developing GD.37 38 However, our knowledge of the LGBTQIA2S+ population tends to remain limited, particularly due to the often restrictive nature of sociodemographic questionnaires that request sex information in a binary manner—that is, female or male—and where sexual orientation and gender are often omitted.31 In such a context, the analysis of secondary data from the majority of gambling studies in the general population is difficult, if not impossible.39 This is particularly true for studies on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gambling.8

    To date, there have been no studies on the gambling habits of the LGBTQIA2S+ population during the COVID-19 pandemic.8 In fact, in the gambling field, very few studies have been conducted specifically on this population.38 40–43 In Canada, there have been no studies investigating the gambling behaviours or healthcare and social service experiences of the LGBTQIA2S+ population with GD in any setting. Knowledge of gambling patterns and risk factors associated with problem gambling is essential to prevent GD among the LGBTQIA2S+ population who gamble. Such insights aim to improve group and individual interventions for this marginalised population, which is known to have a higher proportion of unmet health needs and more limited access to healthcare and social services.44 Furthermore, the findings from a comprehensive study will help formulate courses of action based on LGBTQIA2S+ population’s experiential knowledge and evidence.45 46

    Objectives

    This research project has two main objectives. The first objective is to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, that is, since March 2020,on gambling behaviours among LGBTQIA2S+ individuals. We aim to describe the gambling patterns of the LGBTQIA2S+ population during the pandemic, and then identify factors associated with GD among LGBTQIA2S+ individuals during the same period. The second objective is to understand the experiences of the LGBTQIA2S+ population with GD and to identify interventions that LGBTQIA2S+ people have found to be effective in addressing problem gambling during the COVID-19 pandemic. With this objective, we want to understand the experiences of LGBTQIA2S+ people with GD and their healthcare and social service experiences during the pandemic and identify individual and population-based interventions that LGBTQIA2S+ people have found to be effective in preventing and treating problem gambling during the pandemic.

    Methods

    Design

    This project is a mixed explanatory and sequential study47 in two phases over 2 years.48 The use of a mixed-methods design combines the strengths of quantitative and qualitative methods.45 These methods are frequently used in research on complex issues, such as mental disorders and gambling.49–51 Phase 1 is a cross-sectional correlational study.52 Phase 2 is a descriptive qualitative study.53 The results of phase 1 will inform the development of phase 2. Phase 1 data collection will begin in the spring of 2023. Phase 2 will take place in the fall of 2023. The study design is presented in figure 1.

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Study design scheme.

    Phase I: quantitative study

    Phase 1 involves an online questionnaire using a stratified random sampling from a web panel that will provide a picture of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the gambling habits of LGBTQIA2S+ people in Canada.

    Eligibility criteria

    Participants must self-identify as sexually and gender-diverse (ie, LGBTQIA2S+), have engaged in at least one gambling activity in the past 12 months, be 18 years of age or older, speak English or French and reside in Canada. This information will be collected through self-reported questions at the beginning of the questionnaire.

    Sample size and sampling method

    The target sample size is 1500. The sample will be recruited using stratified random sampling via a web panel containing a database of LGBTQIA2S+ respondents. The size of the sample was determined to obtain the minimum number of people with problem gambling (n=30) needed to conduct phase 2 of the study. This selection is based on the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) score,54 the prevalence of problem gambling in Canada,1 and the number of participants needed to develop a 10-variable regression model, that is, 10 participants per variable (min. 100).55

    Data collection

    Data will be collected through an online questionnaire on a secure platform using a stratified random sampling. The questionnaire, composed of validated tools and inspired by our ongoing study on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the general population in Quebec,21 will be divided into four sections: (1) sociodemographic profile (including sex, gender, sexual orientation, behaviour and attraction); (2) impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic; (3) impacts of COVID-19 on gambling practice and (4) health profile and experience with healthcare and services.

    At the end of the questionnaire, individuals will be asked to indicate their interest in participating in phase 2 of the study. The severity of problem gambling, which is the dependent variable in this study, will be assessed using the PGSI.54 The PGSI consists of nine questions with a Likert scale. A score between 0 and 3 is established for each answer and added up to give a score between 0 and 27. The results are used to determine the severity of gambling: non-problematic gambling (0), low-risk gambling (1–2), moderate-risk gambling (3–7) and probable GD (>8). Problem gambling is defined by a score greater than 3 and includes those at moderate risk and with probable GD.56 This validated tool57 has been used in recent gambling prevalence studies in Canada, as well as in our current study of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the general population who gamble.21 58

    Data analysis

    Descriptive analyses (eg, proportions, means, SD, medians, etc.) will be used to describe the characteristics of those who participated in the study and to provide a picture of the impact of the pandemic on LGBTQIA2S+ people who gamble. Multivariate logistic regression models will be used to identify variables that predispose LGBTQIA2S+ individuals to problem gambling during the pandemic: for example, age, sex, gender, marital status, employment, alcohol, drug and tobacco uses, Patient Health Questionnaire 2-item (PHQ-2) score (depressive symptoms) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item (GAD-2) score (anxiety symptoms) as a function of PGSI score.59 60 Descriptive analyses and regression models will be performed using SPSS software. As expected in a mixed explanatory and sequential design, the results of phase 1 will guide the development of phase 2.61

    Phase II: qualitative study

    Phase 2 will provide an in-depth description of the experiences of LGBTQIA2S+ people with problem gambling, including their healthcare and social service experiences, and will identify individual and population-based interventions they consider effective in prevention and treatment received or desired during the pandemic through semistructured interviews (n=30).53 62

    Eligibility criteria

    To participate in the semistructured interviews, individuals must have participated in phase 1 of the study, have agreed to be contacted for phase 2 of the study at the end of the online questionnaire and have a PGSI score greater than 3.

    Sampling size and sampling method

    The sample will consist of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals (n=30). The sampling method will be targeted and use maximum variation in order to include various profiles (gender, sexual orientation, age, etc.). In descriptive qualitative research, a sample size of 30 generally allows for rich and meaningful data as well as data saturation63 and is consistent with standards observed in the gambling literature.64–66 However, the sample size could be modified during data collection according to the observed saturation.

    Data collection

    Semistructured interviews (60–90 min) will be conducted in French or English, virtually (or if not possible by telephone), depending on the preferences of the participants. Interviews will be conducted by a team member with advanced expertise in qualitative methods and experience in semistructured interviews.

    The interview guides will be structured to better understand the experiences of LGBTQIA2S+ people with problem gambling, including their healthcare and social service experiences, as well as to identify individual-based and population-based interventions deemed effective during the pandemic.67 68 Open-ended questions will explore their problem gambling trajectory (changes in gambling practices and impact of the pandemic), their mental health in general (personal history, current mental health, lifestyle habits, variation and changes over time), their healthcare and social service pathways (eg, types of healthcare and services, frequency of use, variation and changes over time), their healthcare experiences before and during the pandemic (eg, healthcare and social service use, positive and negative experiences in terms of accessibility, coordination, continuity of care, respect for values and needs, experiences as a member of a minority and often marginalised subgroup) and their views on individual and population-based interventions or programmes for the prevention and treatment of problem gambling during the pandemic. If needed, various interventions and programmes will be presented to them, and they will be asked to give their opinion on them. The interviews will be recorded in video format and then transcribed as anonymised verbatim.

    Data analysis

    A thematic analysis will be performed.68 The interview verbatims will first be coded and classified by themes independently by two members of the research team. Similar themes will be grouped together in a thematic tree structure. Iterative phases of analysis will be carried out so that the research team members can appropriate the content of the analysis and the coding process, as well as develop a common understanding of the context and the data studied.47 This iterative process will allow for the triangulation of research team members’ expertise and knowledge (medical, psychological, social work, nursing, etc.). NVivo software will be used to manage the qualitative data.

    Integration phase

    An integration phase will follow the two phases of the study. Matrices, diagrams, graphs and tables will be produced to integrate the quantitative and qualitative data.61 The project will end with a coconstruction workshop using the TRIAGE Method (Technique of Information Retrieval by Facilitating a Group of Experts), which is an inductive and structured information gathering method aimed at obtaining a consensus within a group.69 This workshop will be conducted with the members of the Advisory Committee (see below) and will provide an opportunity to formulate courses of action to improve interventions and health and social care for LGTBQIA2S+ individuals with problematic gambling in a future pandemic or health crisis and to reduce the negative consequences associated with GD in the LGBTQIA2S+ population. This workshop will also identify key messages for all groups that will benefit from the project (LGBTQIA2S+ individuals, regulators, practice settings, general public, scientific community, etc.).

    Public involvement statement

    To ensure that the project is relevant to the needs of the LGBTQIA2S+ population and stakeholders in the field, and to ensure integrated knowledge mobilisation, we will form an advisory committee that will meet three times a year. The eight-member committee will be composed of patient partners with lived experiences and organisations representing practice settings.

    Discussion

    To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to specifically examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on LGBTQIA2S+ gambling.8 It is also the first Canadian study to investigate LGBTQIA2S+ gambling and is one of the first internationally.38 40 41 43 70 71 This study will generate new knowledge about an understudied population at higher risk for GD in an inclusive, stakeholder-driven manner. This project will also allow the identification of interventions deemed effective by LGBTQIA2S+ individuals. These data are of major importance for improving interventions in future pandemic or crisis situations. Indeed, the experiential knowledge of those affected is critical to the development of effective public policy and population-based interventions that meet the needs of LGBTQIA2S+ people in order to reduce the harms associated with problem gambling in this population.72

    Ultimately, we hope that this project will have a major impact on the area of health and social services for LGBTQIA2S+ people with GD. It is important to identify interventions that are effective and appropriate for each individual, based on their sex, gender and sexual orientation, to ensure appropriate care and to develop harm-reduction strategies and interventions for this marginalised population.

    Ethics statements

    Patient consent for publication

    Acknowledgments

    We would like to thank Annie Desjardins, a patient-partner, for her involvement in the study and the revision of the protocol. We would also like to thank GRIS-ESTRIE, Association des Intervenants en Dépendance du Québec, Jeu : Aide et Référence and Réseau-1 Québec for their collaboration on the project.

    References

    1. ↵
      2. Williams RJ ,
      3. Leonard CA ,
      4. Belanger YD , et al
      . Gambling and problem gambling in Canada in 2018: prevalence and changes since 2002. Can J Psychiatry 2021;66:485–94. doi:10.1177/0706743720980080
      OpenUrl
    2. ↵
      2. Potenza MN ,
      3. Balodis IM ,
      4. Derevensky J , et al
      . Gambling disorder. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2019;5:51. doi:10.1038/s41572-019-0099-7
      OpenUrl
    3. ↵
      1. CSSA
      . Les lignes directrices sur les habitudes de jeu à moindre risque. 2021. Available: https://gamblingguidelines.ca/app/uploads/2021/01/LRGG-Lower-Risk-Gambling-Guidelines-Poster-2021-fr.pdf [Accessed 21 Apr 2022].
    4. ↵
      1. APA
      . Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 2013.
    5. ↵
      2. Abbott MW
      . Gambling and gambling-related harm: recent world health organization initiatives. Public Health 2020;184:56–9. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2020.04.001
      OpenUrl
    6. ↵
      2. Korn DA ,
      3. Shaffer HJ
      . Gambling and the health of the public: adopting a public health perspective. J Gambl Stud 1999;15:289–365. doi:10.1023/a:1023005115932
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    7. ↵
      1. Loto-Québec
      . Rapport annuel 2020-2021. 2021. Available: https://societe.lotoquebec.com/dam/jcr:8fbd0cff-8a75-4bc0-975c-69e9a2ab1bf9/rapport-annuel-2020-2021-loto-quebec.pdf [Accessed 21 Apr 2022].
    8. ↵
      2. Brodeur M ,
      3. Audette-Chapdelaine S ,
      4. Savard A-C , et al
      . Gambling and the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2021;111:110389. doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2021.110389
      OpenUrl
    9. ↵
      2. Economou M ,
      3. Souliotis K ,
      4. Malliori M , et al
      . Problem gambling in Greece: prevalence and risk factors during the financial crisis. J Gambl Stud 2019;35:1193–210. doi:10.1007/s10899-019-09843-2
      OpenUrlPubMed
    10. ↵
      2. Jiménez-Murcia S ,
      3. Fernández-Aranda F ,
      4. Granero R , et al
      . Gambling in Spain: update on experience, research and policy. Addiction 2014;109:1595–601. doi:10.1111/add.12232
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. ↵
      2. Olason DT ,
      3. Hayer T ,
      4. Brosowski T , et al
      . Gambling in the mist of economic crisis: results from three national prevalence studies from Iceland. J Gambl Stud 2015;31:759–74. doi:10.1007/s10899-015-9523-4
      OpenUrlPubMed
    12. ↵
      2. Gainsbury SM ,
      3. Russell A ,
      4. Wood R , et al
      . How risky is Internet gambling? A comparison of subgroups of Internet gamblers based on problem gambling status. New Media & Society 2015;17:861–79. doi:10.1177/1461444813518185
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    13. ↵
      2. Hing N ,
      3. Cherney L ,
      4. Gainsbury SM , et al
      . Maintaining and losing control during Internet gambling: a qualitative study of gamblers’ experiences. New Media & Society 2015;17:1075–95. doi:10.1177/1461444814521140
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    14. ↵
      2. Griffiths S ,
      3. Reith G ,
      4. Wardle H , et al
      . Pandemics and epidemics: public health and gambling harms. Public Health 2020;184:1–2. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2020.06.022
      OpenUrlPubMed
    15. ↵
      2. Davies R
      . Frequent gamblers betting more despite coronavirus sports lockdown, study says | gambling | the guardian. 2020. Available: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/24/growth-in-problem-gambling-amid-coronavirus-lockdown
    16. ↵
      2. King DL ,
      3. Delfabbro PH ,
      4. Billieux J , et al
      . Problematic online gaming and the COVID-19 pandemic. J Behav Addict 2020;9:184–6. doi:10.1556/2006.2020.00016
      OpenUrl
    17. ↵
      1. Studies RC on G
      . COVID-19 and gambling: impacts, transformations, and reflections. Montreal, 2020. Available: https://www.greo.ca/Modules/EvidenceCentre/Details/covid-19-and-gambling-impacts-transformations-and-reflections
    18. ↵
      1. Corporation OL and G
      . Annual report 2020-2021. 2021.
    19. ↵
      1. Loto-Québec
      . Rapport annuel 2020-2021. 2021.
    20. ↵
      2. Lindner P ,
      3. Forsström D ,
      4. Jonsson J , et al
      . Transitioning between online gambling modalities and decrease in total gambling activity, but no indication of increase in problematic online gambling intensity during the first phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in sweden: a time series forecast study. Front Public Health 2020;8:554542. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.554542
    21. ↵
      2. Brodeur M ,
      3. Audette-Chapdelaine S ,
      4. Savard A-C , et al
      . Gambling and the COVID-19 pandemic in the province of Quebec (Canada): protocol for a mixed-methods study. BMJ Open 2021;11:e048785. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048785
    22. ↵
      2. Håkansson A
      . Changes in gambling behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic-A web survey study in Sweden. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:4013. doi:10.3390/ijerph17114013
    23. ↵
      2. Turner NE
      . COVID-19 and gambling in Ontario. JGI 2020;44. doi:10.4309/jgi.2020.44.1
    24. ↵
      2. Price A
      . Online gambling in the midst of covid-19: a nexus of mental health concerns, substance use and financial stress. Int J Ment Health Addict 2022;20:362–79. doi:10.1007/s11469-020-00366-1
      OpenUrl
    25. ↵
      2. Håkansson A ,
      3. Fernández-Aranda F ,
      4. Menchón JM , et al
      . Gambling during the COVID-19 crisis-a cause for concern. J Addict Med 2020;14:e10–2. doi:10.1097/ADM.0000000000000690
      OpenUrlPubMed
    26. ↵
      2. Auer M ,
      3. Malischnig D ,
      4. Griffiths MD
      . Gambling before and during the COVID-19 pandemic among European regular sports bettors: an empirical study using behavioral tracking data. Int J Ment Health Addict 2020:1–8. doi:10.1007/s11469-020-00327-8
    27. ↵
      2. Håkansson A
      . Impact of COVID-19 on online gambling - A general population survey during the pandemic. Front Psychol 2020;11:568543. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.568543
    28. ↵
      2. Yahya AS ,
      3. Khawaja S
      . Problem gambling during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prim Care Companion CNS Disord 2020;22:20com02690. doi:10.4088/PCC.20com02690
    29. ↵
      2. Håkansson A ,
      3. Jönsson C ,
      4. Kenttä G
      . Psychological distress and problem gambling in elite athletes during COVID-19 restrictions-A web survey in top leagues of three sports during the pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:6693. doi:10.3390/ijerph17186693
    30. ↵
      2. Wardle H
      . The emerging adults gambling survey: study protocol. Wellcome Open Res 2020;5:102. doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15969.1
    31. ↵
      2. CJ C
      . Jeux de hasard et d’argent auprès des personnes de la diversité sexuelle et de genre: la nécessité d’une approche inclusive [submitted article]. Journal of Gambling Issues 2020.
    32. ↵
      1. Fondation Jasmin Roy
      . Sondage réalités LGBT. Available: https://fondationjasminroy.com/initiative/sondagerealiteslgbt [Accessed 22 Apr 2022].
    33. ↵
      2. Deutsch MB
      . Making it count: improving estimates of the size of transgender and gender nonconforming populations. LGBT Health 2016;3:181–5. doi:10.1089/lgbt.2016.0013
      OpenUrl
    34. ↵
      2. Silveri G ,
      3. Schimmenti S ,
      4. Prina E , et al
      . Barriers in care pathways and unmet mental health needs in LGBTIQ + communities. Int Rev Psychiatry 2022;34:215–29. doi:10.1080/09540261.2022.2075256
      OpenUrl
    35. ↵
      2. Zeeman L ,
      3. Sherriff N ,
      4. Browne K , et al
      . A review of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGBTI) health and healthcare inequalities. Eur J Public Health 2019;29:974–80. doi:10.1093/eurpub/cky226
      OpenUrlPubMed
    36. ↵
      2. Canada S
      . Indicateurs de la santé mentale des canadiens cisgenres et transgenres. Canada, 2018. Available: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85002x/2020001/article/00009/tbl/tbl13fra.htm
    37. ↵
      2. Lyne C
      . Portrait sociodémographique et de santé des populations LBG au québec. 2012. Available: https://chairedspg.uqam.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/upload_files_Rapport_Portrait_sociodemo_Chamberland_et_al._Resume_juilllet_2012.pdf [Accessed 22 Apr 2022].
    38. ↵
      2. Grant JE ,
      3. Potenza MN
      . Sexual orientation of men with pathological gambling: prevalence and psychiatric comorbidity in a treatment-seeking sample. Compr Psychiatry 2006;47:515–8. doi:10.1016/j.comppsych.2006.02.005
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    39. ↵
      2. Waite S ,
      3. Denier N
      . A research note on Canada’s LGBT data landscape: where we are and what the future holds. Can Rev Sociol 2019;56:93–117. doi:10.1111/cars.12232
      OpenUrl
    40. ↵
      2. Broman N ,
      3. Hakansson A
      . Problematic gaming and Internet use but not gambling may be overrepresented in sexual minorities-a pilot population web survey study. Front Psychol 2018;9:2184. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02184
    41. ↵
      2. Rider GN ,
      3. McMorris BJ ,
      4. Gower AL , et al
      . Gambling behaviors and problem gambling: a population-based comparison of transgender/gender diverse and cisgender adolescents. J Gambl Stud 2019;35:79–92. doi:10.1007/s10899-018-9806-7
      OpenUrl
    42. ↵
      2. Birch P ,
      3. Ireland JL ,
      4. Strickland CR , et al
      . n.d. Examining problematic gambling and mental health in a LGBTI community: a preliminary study. MRAJ doi:10.18103/mra.v0i3.202
    43. ↵
      2. Richard J ,
      3. Martin-Storey A ,
      4. Wilkie E , et al
      . Variations in gambling disorder symptomatology across sexual identity among College student-athletes. J Gambl Stud 2019;35:1303–16. doi:10.1007/s10899-019-09838-z
      OpenUrl
    44. ↵
      2. Cotton J-C
      . Les soins et services offerts aux personnes trans, non-binaires et en questionnement identitaire de genre: état de la situation. Available: https://www.usherbrooke.ca/actualites/evenements/details/44851 [Accessed 22 Apr 2022].
    45. ↵
      2. Coulter A ,
      3. Locock L ,
      4. Ziebland S , et al
      . Collecting data on patient experience is not enough: they must be used to improve care. BMJ 2014;348:g2225. doi:10.1136/bmj.g2225
    46. ↵
      2. Black N
      . Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ 2013;346:f167. doi:10.1136/bmj.f167
    47. ↵
      2. Creswell JW ,
      3. Creswell JD
      . Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 2018.
    48. ↵
      2. Hong QN ,
      3. Fàbregues S ,
      4. Bartlett G , et al
      . The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. EFI 2018;34:285–91. doi:10.3233/EFI-180221
      OpenUrl
    49. ↵
      2. Dobbs PD ,
      3. Hodges EJ ,
      4. Dunlap CM , et al
      . Addiction vs. dependence: a mixed methods analysis of young adult JUUL users. Addict Behav 2020;107:106402. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106402
      OpenUrlPubMed
    50. ↵
      2. Seaman EL ,
      3. Howard DE ,
      4. Green KM , et al
      . A sequential explanatory mixed methods study of young adult tobacco and marijuana co-use. Subst Use Misuse 2019;54:2177–90. doi:10.1080/10826084.2019.1638409
      OpenUrl
    51. ↵
      2. John B ,
      3. Holloway K ,
      4. Davies N , et al
      . Gambling harm as a global public health concern: a mixed method investigation of trends in wales. Front Public Health 2020;8:320. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.00320
    52. ↵
      2. Lau F
      . Methods for correlational studies. In: Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach. 2017.
    53. ↵
      2. Sandelowski M
      . What’s in a name? qualitative description revisited. Res Nurs Health 2010;33:77–84. doi:10.1002/nur.20362
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    54. ↵
      2. Ferris J ,
      3. Wynne H
      . L’Indice canadien du jeu excessif. centre canadien de lutte contre L’alcoolisme et les toxicomanies 2001. Available: http://www.jogoremoto.pt/docs/extra/Jbsm2N.pdf [Accessed 22 Apr 2022].
    55. ↵
      2. Peduzzi P ,
      3. Concato J ,
      4. Kemper E , et al
      . A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:1373–9. doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(96)00236-3
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    56. ↵
      2. Costes J-M
      . Quelle part du chiffre d’affaire des jeux d’argent est-elle attribuable aux joueurs problématiques? observatoire des jeux. Available: https://www.ofdt.fr/odj/Note_CA_atribuable_JP_2016-03-18.pdf [Accessed 22 Apr 2022].
    57. ↵
      2. Smith GJ ,
      3. Wynne HG
      . Measuring gambling and problem gambling in alberta using the canadian problem gambling index (CPGI): final report. Alberta Gaming Research Institute, 2015.
    58. ↵
      2. Kairouz S ,
      3. Nadeau L ,
      4. Paradis C , et al
      . Enquête ENHJEU-québec. Available: https://www.concordia.ca/fr/recherche/chairejeu/recherche/projets/enhjeu-quebec.html [Accessed 24 Apr 2022].
    59. ↵
      2. Bursac Z ,
      3. Gauss CH ,
      4. Williams DK , et al
      . Purposeful selection of variables in logistic regression. Source Code Biol Med 2008;3:17. doi:10.1186/1751-0473-3-17
    60. ↵
      2. Harrell FE ,
      3. Lee KL ,
      4. Mark DB
      . Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 1996;15:361–87. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960229)15:4<361::AID-SIM168>3.0.CO;2-4
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    61. ↵
      2. Fetters MD ,
      3. Curry LA ,
      4. Creswell JW
      . Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices. Health Serv Res 2013;48:2134–56. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12117
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    62. ↵
      2. Pope C ,
      3. van Royen P ,
      4. Baker R
      . Qualitative methods in research on healthcare quality. Qual Saf Health Care 2002;11:148–52. doi:10.1136/qhc.11.2.148
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    63. ↵
      2. Sandelowski M
      . Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health 1995;18:179–83. doi:10.1002/nur.4770180211
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    64. ↵
      2. Reith G ,
      3. Dobbie F
      . Gambling careers: a longitudinal, qualitative study of gambling behaviour. Addiction Research & Theory 2013;21:376–90. doi:10.3109/16066359.2012.731116
      OpenUrl
    65. ↵
      2. Kristiansen S ,
      3. Trabjerg CM
      . Legal gambling availability and youth gambling behaviour: a qualitative longitudinal study. Int J Soc Welfare 2017;26:218–29. doi:10.1111/ijsw.12231 Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/14682397/26/3
      OpenUrl
    66. ↵
      2. Anderson S ,
      3. Dobbie F ,
      4. Reith G
      . Recovery from problem gambling: a qualitative study. scottish centre for social research. 2009. Available: http://www.jogoremoto.pt/docs/extra/hLkJ3d.pdf
    67. ↵
      2. Dicicco-Bloom B ,
      3. Crabtree BF
      . The qualitative research interview. Med Educ 2006;40:314–21. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    68. ↵
      2. Miles MB ,
      3. Huberman AM ,
      4. Saldana J
      . Qualitative data analysis A methods sourcebook. 2018.
    69. ↵
      2. Gervais M ,
      3. Pépin G
      . Triage: a new group technique gaining recognition in evaluation. Evaluation Journal of Australasia 2002;2:45–9. doi:10.1177/1035719X0200200212
      OpenUrl
    70. ↵
      2. Bush R ,
      3. Russell AMT ,
      4. Staiger PK , et al
      . Risk and protective factors for the development of gambling-related harms and problems among australian sexual minority men. BMC Psychol 2021;9:102. doi:10.1186/s40359-021-00597-4
    71. ↵
      2. Hershberger SL ,
      3. Bogaert AF
      . Male and female sexual orientation differences in gambling. Personality and Individual Differences 2005;38:1401–11. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.002
      OpenUrl
    72. ↵
      2. Brownson RC ,
      3. Chriqui JF ,
      4. Stamatakis KA
      . Understanding evidence-based public health policy. Am J Public Health 2009;99:1576–83. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.156224
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science

    Footnotes

    • Contributors MB designed and wrote the original proposal in collaboration with PR, J-CC, EM, AM, M-EP, AL, DJ-A, YC, CL, SA-C, A-MA, KB, SD, OS and CH. All authors participated in discussing the design of the study and developing the research protocol. MB was responsible for drafting this manuscript and was supported by AMA. All authors have read and approved the manuscript. All authors are responsible for data collection and analysis.

    • Funding This project is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Pandemic COVID-19 Global Health Impact Studies competition (funding number : W12-179925). This project addressing issues associated with gambling by LGBTQIA2S+ populations during the COVID-19 pandemic received a positive Notice of Decision from CIHR in February 2022.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting or dissemination plans of this research. Refer to the Methods section for further details.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.