AzTrials
AzTrials

Mental HealthNCT06904794

Evaluation of the Gambling Habits of Adolescents and Young Adults Post-COVID-19 and Implementation of a Digital Escape Room Intervention for Preventing Gambling in High School Students

A study testing GAMBL-OUT program in people with Mental Health, run by Hospital Miguel Servet at 1 site in Spain.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Gambling behaviors among adolescents and young adults have been experiencing an upward trend in the last years, possibly because of new habits developed during the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 16 to 18 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Mental Health
What is being tested?
GAMBL-OUT program
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
240 participants
Where
1 siteSpain
Study dates
2 Apr 2025to 31 Dec 2026
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 16 to 18 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child, Adult

Who may be able to join

  • Only high school students aged between 16 and 18
  • Being able to read and understand the Spanish language
  • Willingness to participate in the study and sign the written informed consent form

Who cannot join

  • Age: <16 years old, or >18 years old

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Javier García Campayo contact

976 50 65 78

investigaprimaria@gmail.com

Spain1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Department of Psychiatry. Miguel Servet University Hospital

    Zaragoza, Zaragoza, 50009

    976 50 65 78

    Javier García Campayo

    Recruiting

Other trials in Spain

About this study

Official title: Evaluation of the Gambling Habits of Adolescents and Young Adults Post-COVID-19 and Implementation of a Digital Escape Room Intervention for Preventing Gambling in High School Students: a Mixed-methods Cluster-randomized Controlled Trial (GAMBL-OUT Project)

Gambling behaviors among adolescents and young adults have been experiencing an upward trend in the last years, possibly because of new habits developed during the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions. Different preventive strategies have been proposed: universal classroom-based interventions have shown promising evidence as preventive tools, but challenges exist in engaging the target audience effectively. Serious games, i.e., those designed with the specific intent to educate, broaden knowledge, and change behaviors, have been tested with positive outcomes. Digital escape rooms constitute a modality of serious game that has shown potential for a variety of educational purposes, but their efficacy for preventing addictive behaviors, as well as their long-term impact, has not been widely studied.

The present project aims at assessing the gambling habits of a sample of 16-25-year-olds in the region of Aragon, Spain, that could be compared to the data gathered before the pandemic started, so not only the prevalence rates can be updated but also potential differences in habits (e.g., preferred gambling alternatives) can be detected. This will undoubtedly help the design of effective preventive measures, such as the GAMBL-OUT digital escape room, a serious game to be implemented in high schools with the aim of increasing knowledge, reducing intentions to gamble, and changing attitudes towards gambling.

Conditions
Mental Health
Being tested
GAMBL-OUT program
Medical subject headings
Psychological Well-Being

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • GAMBL-OUT programBehavioural

    The GAMBL-OUT program consists of two sessions: the first one involves a digital escape room to be delivered in the classroom and a series of physical props to be used during the experience. In small groups (4-5 students), participants need to work together to solve different puzzles and riddles, all of them related to the story of young adults who are dealing with problem gambling. By the end of the game, which will have a limited time (50 minutes), each group will have gained access to a different password. The second session will start from here: each group will share their password so the final puzzle can be solved, and the game will conclude with in a group discussion about what was learned (40 minutes).

Study groups in NCT06904794
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
GAMBL-OUT escape roomExperimentalNot described
Receives: Behavioral: GAMBL-OUT program
Wait-list controlNo interventionNot described

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Problem gambling screening (PGSI)

    In the intervention group. This 9-item scale assesses problematic gambling behaviors in the last 12 months and harmful consequences related to gambling. Items are rated on a 4-point scale (0 = never, 3 = almost always). The final score ranges from 0 to 27 and can be interpreted as follows: 0 = non-problem gamblers, 1-2 = low-risk gamblers, 3-7 = moderate-risk gamblers, and 8 and above = problem gamblers).

    Measured: Baseline

  2. Problem gambling screening (PGSI)

    In the intervention group. This 9-item scale assesses problematic gambling behaviors in the last 12 months and harmful consequences related to gambling. Items are rated on a 4-point scale (0 = never, 3 = almost always). The final score ranges from 0 to 27 and can be interpreted as follows: 0 = non-problem gamblers, 1-2 = low-risk gamblers, 3-7 = moderate-risk gamblers, and 8 and above = problem gamblers).

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  3. Problem gambling screening (PGSI)

    In the control group. This 9-item scale assesses problematic gambling behaviors in the last 12 months and harmful consequences related to gambling. Items are rated on a 4-point scale (0 = never, 3 = almost always). The final score ranges from 0 to 27 and can be interpreted as follows: 0 = non-problem gamblers, 1-2 = low-risk gamblers, 3-7 = moderate-risk gamblers, and 8 and above = problem gamblers).

    Measured: Baseline

  4. Problem gambling screening (PGSI)

    In the control group. This 9-item scale assesses problematic gambling behaviors in the last 12 months and harmful consequences related to gambling. Items are rated on a 4-point scale (0 = never, 3 = almost always). The final score ranges from 0 to 27 and can be interpreted as follows: 0 = non-problem gamblers, 1-2 = low-risk gamblers, 3-7 = moderate-risk gamblers, and 8 and above = problem gamblers).

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

Secondary outcomes (46)
  1. Gender

    Gender of participants: male, female, other. Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  2. Age

    Open-ended question where subjects are asked to indicate numerically their current age. Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  3. Nationality

    Country of birth of participants: Spain, other (please specify). Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  4. Current city of residence

    Place of current residence: Zaragoza capital, Zaragoza province, Huesca capital, Huesca province, Teruel capita, Teruel province. Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  5. Cohabitation

    Who do you live with: first degree relatives (parents, siblings), second degree relatives (grandparents, uncles, aunts, uncles), friends, alone, other (please specify). Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  6. Country of birth of parents

    Open-ended question where participants have to indicate in which country their father was born, or where their mother was born. Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  7. Education

    Which year of the baccalaureate are you currently in: first or second. Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  8. Employment situation

    Indicate how many hours per week you work: no work, between 1 and 10 hours per week, between 11 and 20 hours per week, between 20 and 30 hours per week, between 30 and 40 hours per week. Both groups

    Measured: Baseline

  9. Amount of money available for leisure per month

    Multiple-choice question ad-hoc where subjects must mark the range of money in euros they have available for leisure. The response options are: 0-100; 101-400; 401-600; 601-1000; 1000 or more. None of the response options is better than the others. In the intervention group

    Measured: Baseline

  10. Amount of money available for leisure per month

    Multiple-choice question ad-hoc where subjects must mark the range of money in euros they have available for leisure. The response options are: 0-100; 101-400; 401-600; 601-1000; 1000 or more. None of the response options is better than the others. In the control group

    Measured: Baseline

  11. Gambling knowledge scale (ad-hoc)

    In the intervention group. This questionnaire is composed of 18 separate items that collect information on different aspects of gambling knowledge. Each item is evaluated on a Likert scale with four response options: 'is totally incorrect', 'is incorrect', 'is correct', 'is totally correct'.

    Measured: Baseline

  12. Gambling knowledge scale (ad-hoc)

    In the intervention group. This questionnaire is composed of 18 separate items that collect information on different aspects of gambling knowledge. Each item is evaluated on a Likert scale with four response options: 'is totally incorrect', 'is incorrect', 'is correct', 'is totally correct'. There is no overall score on this scale as each item assesses different aspects of gambling knowledge.

    Measured: up to 2 weeks

  13. Gambling knowledge scale (ad-hoc)

    In the intervention group. This questionnaire is composed of 18 separate items that collect information on different aspects of gambling knowledge. Each item is evaluated on a Likert scale with four response options: 'is totally incorrect', 'is incorrect', 'is correct', 'is totally correct'. There is no overall score on this scale as each item assesses different aspects of gambling knowledge.

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  14. Gambling knowledge scale (ad-hoc)

    In the control group. This questionnaire is composed of 18 separate items that collect information on different aspects of gambling knowledge. Each item is evaluated on a Likert scale with four response options: 'is totally incorrect', 'is incorrect', 'is correct', 'is totally correct'. There is no overall score on this scale as each item assesses different aspects of gambling knowledge.

    Measured: Baseline

  15. Gambling knowledge scale (ad-hoc)

    In the control group. This questionnaire is composed of 18 separate items that collect information on different aspects of gambling knowledge. Each item is evaluated on a Likert scale with four response options: 'is totally incorrect', 'is incorrect', 'is correct', 'is totally correct'. There is no overall score on this scale as each item assesses different aspects of gambling knowledge.

    Measured: up to 2 weeks

  16. Gambling knowledge scale (ad-hoc)

    In the control group. This questionnaire is composed of 18 separate items that collect information on different aspects of gambling knowledge. Each item is evaluated on a Likert scale with four response options: 'is totally incorrect', 'is incorrect', 'is correct', 'is totally correct'. There is no overall score on this scale as each item assesses different aspects of gambling knowledge.

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  17. Ad hoc questions asking attitudes towards gambling

    In the intervention group

    Measured: Baseline

  18. Ad hoc questions asking attitudes towards gambling

    In the intervention group

    Measured: up to 2 weeks

  19. Ad hoc questions asking attitudes towards gambling

    In the intervention group

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  20. Ad hoc questions asking attitudes towards gambling

    In the control group

    Measured: Baseline

  21. Ad hoc questions asking attitudes towards gambling

    In the control group

    Measured: up to 2 weeks

  22. Ad hoc questions asking attitudes towards gambling

    In the control group

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  23. Ad hoc questions asking intention to gamble in the future

    In the intervention group

    Measured: Baseline

  24. Ad hoc questions asking intention to gamble in the future

    In the intervention group

    Measured: up to 2 weeks

  25. Ad hoc questions asking intention to gamble in the future

    In the intervention group

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  26. Ad hoc questions asking intention to gamble in the future

    In the control group

    Measured: Baseline

  27. Ad hoc questions asking intention to gamble in the future

    In the control group

    Measured: up to 2 weeks

  28. Ad hoc questions asking intention to gamble in the future

    In the control group

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  29. Ad hoc questions asking the gambling habits

    In the intervention group

    Measured: Baseline

  30. Ad hoc questions asking the gambling habits

    In the intervention group

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  31. Ad hoc questions asking the gambling habits

    In the control group

    Measured: Baseline

  32. Ad hoc questions asking the gambling habits

    In the control group

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  33. Implementation outcome: General opinion of the intervention

    The participants indicate their general opinion of the intervention once it is over: 'very positive, I loved it', 'positive, it was a good experience', 'neutral, I was indifferent', 'negative, there were aspects that did not convince me', 'very negative, I was disappointed'. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  34. Implementation outcome: Ease of use of the platform

    Participants indicate how easy the platform was for them to use: yes or no. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  35. Implementation outcome: Duration of the intervention

    Opinion on the length of the intervention: 'I thought it was too short', 'I thought it was adequate', 'I thought it was too long'. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  36. Implementation outcome: Difficulty of the instructions received through the platform

    Opinion on the difficulty of the instructions received through the platform: 'yes', "no", "most yes", "most no". Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  37. Implementation outcome: Amount of information received

    Opinion on the amount of information received: 'excessive', 'adequate', 'insufficient'. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  38. Implementation outcome: Need for prior knowledge to carry out the intervention

    Opinion on the need for prior knowledge to carry out the intervention: yes or no. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  39. Implementation outcome: Adequacy of the content of the intervention for the target population

    Opinion on the appropriateness of the content of the intervention for the target population: 'I think it is too easy', 'I think it is suitable for adolescents', 'I think it is too complex', 'other (specify)'. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  40. Implementation outcome: Effectiveness in conveying information to you about the risks of gambling addiction

    Do you think that the Escape Room has been effective in providing you with information about the risks of gambling addiction?: 'very effective', 'effective', 'neutral', 'not very effective', 'not at all effective'. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  41. Implementation outcome: Perception of increased knowledge of gambling

    Opinion on perceived increase in knowledge of gambling: 'a lot', 'some', 'a little', 'not at all'. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  42. Implementation outcome: Integration of educational messages into the dynamics of the Escape Room.

    Opinion on the adequate integration of the educational messages in the Escape Room dynamics: 'quite well', 'well', 'little', 'practically not at all'. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  43. Implementation outcome: Adequacy of this Escape Room for the prevention of gambling among young people

    Opinion on the suitability of this Escape Room for the prevention of gambling in young people: yes or no. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  44. Implementation outcome: Opinion on whether participants think it is likely that high schools in Aragon will integrate this Escape Room into their regular programming.

    Opinion on whether participants think it is likely that high schools in Aragon will integrate this Escape Room into their regular programming: yes or no. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  45. Implementation outcome: Recommendation of this Escape Room to young people in the participants' environment.

    Opinion on whether the participants would recommend this Escape Room to young people in their environment for their training on the functioning and risks of gambling: yes or no. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

  46. Implementation outcome: Consideration of whether this Escape Room is a useful resource for the prevention of gambling among young people.

    Consideration of whether this Escape Room is a useful resource for gambling prevention in young people: yes or no. Both groups

    Measured: Three-months follow-up

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted1 Apr 2025
  2. Study start2 Apr 2025
  3. Primary completion30 Dec 2026 (estimated)
  4. Study completion31 Dec 2026 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
240 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06904794
Sponsor's protocol ID
PI24/364
Status last verified
Jul 2026
First submitted
25 Mar 2025
Last updated
23 Jul 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No

Publications

  • Barcelo-Soler A, Monreal-Bartolome A, Perez-Aranda A, Campos D, Beltran-Ruiz M, Puebla-Guedea M, Cabrera-Gil I, Garcia-Campayo J, Lopez-Del-Hoyo Y. Evaluation of the gambling habits of Spanish adolescents and young adults post-COVID-19 and implementation of a digital escape room intervention for preventing gambling: study protocol of a cluster-randomized controlled trial (GAMBL-OUT project). BMC Psychol. 2025 Jul 1;13(1):690. doi: 10.1186/s40359-025-03035-x.

    PubMed 40598402

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing GAMBL-OUT program in people with Mental Health, run by Hospital Miguel Servet at 1 site in Spain.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Jul 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Javier García Campayo (976 50 65 78, investigaprimaria@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Problem gambling screening (PGSI) (time frame: Baseline). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06904794, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Jul 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in