NODS-Clip

 

Advantages:

• Short and easy to use

• Based on DSM-IV criteria)

• Identifies 94% of problem gamblers and 99% of pathological gamblers as identified by the full NODS measure.(Toce-Gerstein M et al, 2009)

​

Note : The NODS-PERC screen identifies 99% of all problem gamblers and 100% of all pathological gamblers as assessed by the full NODS (Volberg et al, 2011)

​

Disadvantages: 

The NODS-CliP identifies lifetime PG (Problem Gamblers).

Using a lifetime context for symptom clustering yields more endorsed problems than past-year time frames for symptom identification.

Gambling related problems evidence considerable waxing and waning from year to year. As a result, the NODS-CliP might not reflect current problems that often associate with treatment seeking.

 

Note : The BBGS screen identifies past-year PG.(current problem identification) and thus has a higher sensitivity (96%) and higher specificity (99%) than the NODS-Clip.

 

Accuracy : 

NODS-Clip Sensitivity 96,2% and Specificity 88,4%   (Toce-Gerstein M et al, 2009)

Positive Predictive Value 87% and Negative Predictive Value 80%   (Volberg et al, 2011)

​

Note : The NODS-PERC screen has a higher specificity than the NODS-Clip, as well as higher PPV and NPV.

Sensitivity 99,7% and Specificity 87,4%   (Toce-Gerstein M et al, 2009)

Positive Predictive Value 88,5% and Negative Predictive Value 96,3%   (Volberg et al, 2011)