iGaming Ontario commissioned a study of problem gambling before the province opened its regulated online market on April 4, 2022. The findings were never published. Documents reported on October 16, 2026, indicate that officials became concerned after researchers found higher-than-expected rates of gambling-related harm.

The documents were released through freedom-of-information proceedings. The study itself remains withheld. That leaves the public without the baseline research intended to measure harm before private online casino and sports-betting sites expanded across Ontario.

Why the missing baseline matters

A baseline gives policymakers a starting point. It allows them to compare conditions before and after a major market change.

Without the study, Ontario has a weaker public record for assessing whether advertising limits, responsible-gambling tools and player interventions are working. It is also harder to distinguish long-standing gambling problems from harms that followed the 2022 market expansion.

The records reportedly show that iGaming Ontario planned to use the research to shape its responsible-gambling program. Officials later discussed keeping the findings confidential after early results raised concerns.

New evidence raises the pressure

A separate study released by ICES on September 16, 2026, found that emergency-department visits involving gambling disorders nearly doubled after Ontario expanded online gambling and legalized single-event sports betting. The increase was especially sharp among males aged 10 to 29 and males aged 30 to 44.

  • Visits were 154 per cent higher than expected among males aged 10 to 29 by the end of the study period.
  • Visits were 116 per cent higher than expected among males aged 30 to 44.
  • More than 70 per cent involved another mental-health condition or heavy substance use.
  • Almost one-third resulted in hospital admission.

ICES reported those findings in its study on emergency-department visits for gambling disorders. Read the ICES report.

That research does not reveal what the withheld pre-launch study found. It does show why an undisclosed starting point matters. Ontario now has evidence of serious pressure on the health system, but less public information about the level of harm before the market opened.

Ontario has newer evidence about gambling-related health impacts, but the public still cannot see the pre-launch research needed to measure the change.

Two agencies, two responsibilities

iGaming Ontario conducts and manages online lottery schemes offered through private operators. The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario regulates operators and suppliers and enforces the Registrar’s Standards for Internet Gaming.

Ontario’s framework requires operators to monitor player behaviour, identify people who may be experiencing harm and intervene with measures such as reminders, limits, breaks, account restrictions or account closure. The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario sets out that guidance for iGaming operators.

iGaming Ontario’s 2021-22 annual report said the agency was commissioning ongoing research into problem gambling. Its 2022-23 report also referred to research on participation and high-risk gambling behaviour, along with plans to use anonymized player data for research.

Those commitments make the withheld study more than an academic dispute. They raise a direct accountability question: how can Ontario test whether its safeguards work if the public cannot see the evidence that established the starting point?

What could change next

  • Lawmakers could seek the full study, including its methodology and results.
  • iGaming Ontario could explain why the findings were withheld.
  • Regulators could compare the missing baseline with current data on emergency visits, helpline contacts, self-exclusion and player interventions.
  • Advertising and responsible-gambling policies could face renewed scrutiny if the withheld results show that risks were underestimated before launch.

iGaming Ontario says freedom-of-information requests are handled under Ontario’s access and privacy rules. The agency states that requests normally receive a response within 30 calendar days, although extensions may apply.

The central issue is not whether one study can explain every gambling-related harm. It cannot. The issue is whether a publicly funded market can credibly claim to be evidence-informed while keeping its pre-launch harm estimate out of public view.