SynthesisThe Australian journal of rural health2021
Models of remote professional supervision for psychologists in rural and remote locations: A systematic review.
Synthesis in The Australian journal of rural health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Models of remote professional supervision for psychologists in rural and remote locations: A systematic review.The Australian journal of rural health · 2021Pooled it
- Defining the rural generalist psychologist: the development and validation of a model of rural psychology practice in Australia.Australian journal of psychology · 2026Article
- Rural and remote psychologists' views on provisional psychologist supervision.Australian journal of psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPsychology workforce shortages in geographically rural or remote contexts have highlighted the need to understand the supervisory experiences of psychologists practising in these locations, and the models of supervision employed to support their practice and improve client safety.
objectiveTo review the models of remote professional supervision and the supervisory experiences of psychologists practising in rural and remote locations.
designUsing the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for mixed-methods systematic review, 8 health and education databases were searched using keyword and subject heading searches.
findingsThe initial search identified 413 studies. A full-text review identified 4 papers that met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to a methodological appraisal by 2 reviewers. Three studies included qualitative data, with 2 using transcribed interviews. Two studies reported quantitative data, with only one study including a statistical analysis of the outcomes. DISCUSSION: The results for the efficacy of the current models of remote supervision being used within the allied health and psychology professions are limited, with methodological limitations cautioning generalisability of results. The experiences of psychologists engaged in remote supervision do not appear to have changed over the past decade despite technological advances.
conclusionsQuality professional supervision is critical for the sustainability of the psychology workforce in rural and remote locations, reducing professional isolation, and for improved patient outcomes. This review identified a need for improved evidence for remote supervision models for psychologists working in geographically rural and remote locations. Lessons can be learned from other health professions' models of remote supervision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.