Report
Understanding the adverse consequences of gambling
This report presents secondary analysis of Year 2 (2024) GSGB data
Results
Potential adverse consequences
The following tables (Table 1a to Table 1e) show the percentages of participants who reported adverse consequences, within each socioeconomic category. Base includes participants who had gambled in the past four weeks. Percentages are weighted, and base size values are unweighted.
Table 1a: PGSI
| PGSI 0 (percentage) | PGSI 1 to 2 (percentage) | PGSI 3 to 7 (percentage) | PGSI 8 or more (percentage) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relationship | 2.2% | 9.7% | 34.6% | 91.6% |
| Health | 0.1% | 24.4% | 71.9% | 95.9% |
| Resources | 2.0% | 11.2% | 42.2% | 91.3% |
| Base size | 7,065 | 1,322 | 468 | 326 |
Table 1b: Equivalised household income quintile
| Lowest quintile (percentage) | Second quintile (percentage) | Third quintile (percentage) | Fourth quintile (percentage) | Highest quintile (percentage) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relationship | 17.3% | 10.9% | 8.0% | 5.5% | 6.4% |
| Health | 20.0% | 13.3% | 11.9% | 9.3% | 10.5% |
| Resources | 18.7% | 12.2% | 8.5% | 5.3% | 5.4% |
| Base size | 1,872 | 1,930 | 1,423 | 1,827 | 1,747 |
Table 1c: Ethnicity
| White (percentage) | Mixed (percentage) | Asian (percentage) | Black (percentage) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relationship | 7.9% | 22.7% | 27.9% | 22.8% |
| Health | 11.5% | 23.6% | 28.3% | 20.5% |
| Resources | 8.2% | 24.0% | 28.5% | 27.3% |
| Base size | 8,467 | 175 | 336 | 120 |
Table 1d: Sex
| Male (percentage) | Female (percentage) | |
|---|---|---|
| Relationship | 7.3% | 12.2% |
| Health | 9.8% | 16.2% |
| Resources | 8.1% | 12.4% |
| Base size | 4,770 | 4,417 |
Table 1e: Age group
| 18 to 24 (percentage) | 25 to 34 (percentage) | 35 to 44 (percentage) | 45 to 54 (percentage) | 55 to 64 (percentage) | 65 to 74 (percentage) | 75 and over (percentage) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relationship | 26.1% | 14.3% | 12.2% | 8.9% | 6.3% | 2.8% | 3.4% |
| Health | 26.8% | 20.1% | 17.6% | 12.8% | 7.6% | 5.0% | 3.5% |
| Resources | 25.4% | 15.6% | 14.6% | 8.3% | 5.8% | 3.4% | 3.5% |
| Base size | 438 | 1,359 | 1,592 | 1,513 | 1,799 | 1,592 | 906 |
Results from regression models are described for each type of potential adverse consequence (resources, relationships, health). For brevity, we describe findings from step 2 of each model (that is, after controlling for the number of gambling activities played), however odds ratios9 and 95 percent confidence intervals from steps 1 and 2 are provided in Table 2 to Table 4.
Adverse Resource Consequences
Females and older participants had lower odds of experiencing potential adverse consequences to resources (that is financial stability or employment) as shown in Table 2. The odds of experiencing adverse consequences to resources were significantly higher amongst Mixed race, Asian, and Black participants, compared with White participants, and amongst those in the lowest income quintile, relative to people in higher income quintiles (that is, quintiles 2 to 5).
Table 2: Odds ratios from logistic regression model predicting potential adverse consequences to resources.
95 percent confidence intervals are given in parentheses. Demographic variables were entered into step 1 of the model, and the ‘number of gambling activities played in the past 4 weeks’ was included in step 2. Analysis includes participants who had gambled in the past 4 weeks.
| Odds Ratio (Step 1) | Odds Ratio (Step 2) | Base size | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.96* (0.96–0.97) | 0.97* (0.97–0.98) | 9,199 |
| Equivalised income | |||
| Lowest quintile | n/a | n/a | 1,872 |
| Second quintile | 0.73* (0.6–0.88) | 0.76* (0.63–0.93) | 1,930 |
| Third quintile | 0.44* (0.35–0.56) | 0.50* (0.39–0.63) | 1,423 |
| Fourth quintile | 0.25* (0.2–0.32) | 0.30* (0.23–0.39) | 1,827 |
| Highest quintile | 0.23* (0.18–0.3) | 0.27* (0.21–0.36) | 1,747 |
| Ethnicity | |||
| White | n/a | n/a | 8,467 |
| Mixed | 2.32* (1.65–3.25) | 2.19* (1.54–3.13) | 175 |
| Asian | 2.74* (2.18–3.45) | 2.9* (2.27–3.71) | 336 |
| Black | 3.03* (2.12–4.32) | 2.97* (2.03–4.34) | 120 |
| Sex | |||
| Male | n/a | n/a | 4,417 |
| Female | 0.62* (0.53–0.72) | 0.69* (0.59–0.81) | 4,470 |
Adverse Relationship Consequences
Older age and being female were significantly associated with reduced odds of experiencing potential adverse consequences to relationships. Black, Mixed race and Asian participants had significantly higher odds of experiencing adverse consequences to relationships compared with White participants. Participants in the lowest income quintile (that is, quintile 1) had significantly higher odds of experiencing adverse consequences to relationships compared to those in higher income quintiles (that is, quintiles 2 to 5).
Table 3: Odds ratios from logistic regression model predicting potential adverse consequences to relationships.
95 percent confidence intervals are provided in parentheses. Demographic variables were entered into step 1 of the model, and the ‘number of gambling activities played in the past 4 weeks’ was included in step 2. Analysis includes participants who had gambled in the past 4 weeks.
| Odds Ratio (Step 1) | Odds Ratio (Step 2) | Base size | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.96* (0.96–0.97) | 0.97* (0.97–0.98) | 9,199 |
| Equivalised income | |||
| Lowest quintile | n/a | n/a | 1,872 |
| Second quintile | 0.70* (0.57–0.85) | 0.74* (0.6–0.91) | 1,930 |
| Third quintile | 0.45* (0.36–0.57) | 0.51* (0.4–0.65) | 1,423 |
| Fourth quintile | 0.29* (0.23–0.37) | 0.35* (0.27–0.45) | 1,827 |
| Highest quintile | 0.30* (0.24–0.39) | 0.37* (0.29–0.48) | 1,747 |
| Ethnicity | |||
| White | n/a | n/a | 8,467 |
| Mixed | 2.24* (1.6–3.16) | 2.14* (1.5–3.06) | 175 |
| Asian | 2.87* (2.28–3.61) | 3.04* (2.38–3.89) | 336 |
| Black | 2.33* (1.6–3.39) | 2.15* (1.43–3.24) | 120 |
| Sex | |||
| Male | n/a | n/a | 4,417 |
| Female | 0.56* (0.48–0.65) | 0.63* (0.53–0.73) | 4,470 |
Adverse Health Consequences
Older age and being female were associated with reduced odds of reporting adverse consequences to health as shown in Table 4. Asian and Mixed race participants had significantly higher odds of experiencing adverse consequences to health compared to White participants. There was no significant difference amongst Black participants. Participants in the lowest income quintile (that is, quintile 1) had significantly higher odds of experiencing adverse health consequences relative to those in higher income quintiles (that is, quintiles 2 to 5).
Table 4: Odds ratios from logistic regression model predicting potential adverse consequences to health.
95 percent confidence intervals are provided in parentheses. Demographic variables were entered into step 1 of the model, and the ‘number of gambling activities played in the past 4 weeks’ was included in step 2. Analysis includes participants who had gambled in the past 4 weeks.
| Odds Ratio (Step 1) | Odds Ratio (Step 2) | Base size | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 0.96* (0.96–0.97) | 0.97* (0.97–0.98) | 9,199 |
| Equivalised income | |||
| Lowest quintile | n/a | n/a | 1,872 |
| Second quintile | 0.72* (0.6–0.87) | 0.76* (0.63–0.93) | 1,930 |
| Third quintile | 0.56* (0.46–0.69) | 0.64* (0.52–0.8) | 1,423 |
| Fourth quintile | 0.4* (0.33–0.5) | 0.5* (0.4–0.62) | 1,827 |
| Highest quintile | 0.42* (0.34–0.52) | 0.53* (0.43–0.66) | 1,747 |
| Ethnicity | |||
| White | n/a | n/a | 8,467 |
| Mixed | 1.62* (1.17–2.26) | 1.5* (1.06–2.13) | 175 |
| Asian | 1.99* (1.59–2.48) | 2.07* (1.63–2.64) | 336 |
| Black | 1.28 (0.87–1.89) | 1.08 (0.7–1.67) | 120 |
| Sex | |||
| Male | n/a | n/a | 4,417 |
| Female | 0.57* (0.5–0.66) | 0.64* (0.56–0.74) | 4,470 |
References
9 Odds ratios compare the likelihood of an outcome between two groups. Each demographic group is compared to a baseline category. For example, individuals identified as Mixed race, Asian, or Black, are compared with those who identify as White. Odds ratios represent the relative likelihood of experiencing potential adverse consequences for each subgroup compared to the ‘White’ baseline category. An odds ratio of 1.0 means that there is no difference between groups. Odds ratios greater than 1.0 indicate that the group has higher odds of adverse consequences compared with the baseline category. Odds ratios less than 1.0 mean that the group has lower odds of adverse consequences compared with the baseline category.
Understanding the adverse consequences of gambling - Methods Next section
Understanding the adverse consequences of gambling - Overlap between potential adverse consequences
Last updated: 2 October 2025
Show updates to this content
No changes to show.