Adolescent internet gaming disorder is gaining clinical recognition as a formal psychiatric condition, yet the therapeutic landscape remains dominated by outpatient cognitive-behavioral approaches. A brief, immersive residential intervention could offer a structurally different lever — particularly for youth whose home environments reinforce compulsive gaming — making even early feasibility signals worth scrutinizing.
This single-group, entry-to-exit evaluation tracked 12 adolescents (ages 11–16) who met DSM-5 criteria for internet gaming disorder through a seven-day structured residential camp. Assessments spanned a hierarchical battery: primary outcomes included the Gaming Disorder Screening Scale, the Game Addiction Scale-7, and visual analog craving scores; secondary measures captured impulsivity (Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11), depression and anxiety (Zung self-rating scales), social avoidance, and empathy (Chinese Interpersonal Reactivity Index). Exploratory indicators added Conners counselor ratings and the Stroop cognitive interference task. Statistical analysis relied on Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with effect size r and Hodges–Lehmann median differences to accommodate the small, non-parametric sample.
Interpreting these results demands substantial caution. A cohort of 12 adolescents with no control arm, randomization, or follow-up window beyond exit cannot support causal claims — what changes are observed could reflect regression to the mean, demand characteristics, or the generic effects of environmental change rather than the specific program design. The residential format itself introduces a confound: simply removing adolescents from home gaming infrastructure for a week would be expected to reduce craving and behavioral scores regardless of program content. Internet gaming disorder also sits in contested diagnostic territory, with prevalence estimates varying widely depending on screening thresholds.
That said, feasibility and safety data from structured camp formats are genuinely sparse in the peer-reviewed literature, and this contribution addresses a real gap in implementation evidence. If larger randomized trials with three- to six-month follow-ups replicate meaningful gains in impulsivity and social functioning, the residential model could become a viable step-care option sitting between outpatient treatment and inpatient psychiatric admission. For now, this is incremental, hypothesis-generating work.
