Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36506784›Full record

ArticleThe Indian journal of occupational therapy2022

Quality of Occupational Therapy Research in India - A Descriptive Review.

Sureshkumar Kamalakannan, Lakshmanan Sethuraman, Manigandan Chockalingam, Selvaraj Samuelkamaleshkumar, Shobana Devi Moorthy, Murali Krishnan Srinivasan, Jothikumar Ramakrishnan, Thirumugam Muthuvel, Karthik Mani

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Indian journal of occupational therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Sureshkumar KamalakannanDepartment of Social Work, Education, and Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, England, United Kingdom.
Lakshmanan SethuramanDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Centre for Addiction Medicine, National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka.
Manigandan ChockalingamDepartment of Health Sciences, National University of Ireland, Galway.
Selvaraj SamuelkamaleshkumarChristian Medical College, Vellore.
Shobana Devi MoorthySmart Sensory Kids.
Murali Krishnan SrinivasanDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research, Chennai.
Jothikumar RamakrishnanHealth Services Executives, Limerick, Ireland.
Thirumugam MuthuvelRehabilitation Research Consultancy, Karaikal, Tamil Nadu, India.
Karthik ManiDepartment of Occupational Therapy, University of Texas Medical Branch, Texas, USA.
Christian Medical College & Hospital · INHealth Service Executive · IEMeenakshi Academy of Higher Education and Research · INNational Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences · INOllscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IEPublic Health Foundation of India · INSensory (United States) · USThe University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston · US

Funding

DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/CPHE/16/1/502650Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Occupational therapy (OT) enhances functional independence in the daily activities of people with disabilities and subsequently their quality of life. Research in OT generates evidence to provide safe and effective services to the disabled. However, OT research in India has been shown to have various methodological limitations. These methodological limitations are expected to impact the quality of OT research as well as the evidence derived from this research to inform decision-making in rehabilitation. The majority of the OT research is disseminated and promoted through the All India Occupational Therapists' Association's (AIOTA) annual national conference (ANC). Analyzing the abstracts, selected for the presentation at the ANC could help understand and strategically improve the quality of OT research in India. Objectives: To explore and describe the quality of OT research in India. Study Design: Descriptive analysis. Methods: Descriptive, nonsystematic review and analysis of the key methodological aspects of the conference abstracts submitted for the AIOTA ANC published in the Results: About 218 abstracts had been selected for either poster or oral presentations in the AIOTA ANC. All the abstracts were included for the review. A total of 8055 participants were recruited for the studies conducted from 2017 to 2021. About 5757 (72%) of the participants were recruited for cross-sectional studies. Nearly 72 (33%) of the abstracts presented were related to cross-sectional studies, 52 (24%) were case studies and 66 (30%) were experimental studies. However, research designs implying highest level of evidence such as systematic reviews were only 4 (2%) and randomized controlled trials were only 9 (4%) with 297 participants. Notably, 203 (98%) of the all the studies evaluating effectiveness of interventions or aiming to investigate associations reported positive results with statistically significant improvements and associations. Conclusion: The review provides invaluable information related to the quality of OT research in India. It implies the need to improve the scientific rigor of the evidence generated in relation to OT research in India. This review also implies the need for a radical change and strengthening of OT research within OT education and professional practice in India. National and global OT associations need to prioritize good quality OT research by enhancing the research skills and competencies of OTs in India. This could help promote evidence-based OT science and develop the OT profession in the world's second-most populous country. In addition, it is also expected to encourage those OT researchers who have been striving to build OT research standards in India.

Indexed as

DisabilityHealth SystemsOccupational TherapyRehabilitationResearch

Identifiers

PMID36506784
PMCPMC7613910
OpenAlexW4311501675

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.