ArticleBMJ open2023
Disabled people's perceptions and experiences of accessing and receiving counselling and psychotherapy: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating the Efficacy of Telehealth-Based Treatments for Depression in Adults: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEvidence indicates that, compared with their non-disabled counterparts, disabled people are likely to face greater mental health challenges as well as significant inequalities in accessing appropriate therapeutic support. Currently, little is known about how disabled people perceive and experience counselling and psychotherapy, what barriers/facilitators to therapy delivery and/or therapy participation exist for disabled clients and whether clinicians sufficiently adapt their practice to meet the needs of this diverse but marginalised population. In this paper, we outline a proposal for undertaking a scoping review that aims to identify and synthesise current research relating to disabled individuals' perceptions of accessibility and experiences of counselling and psychotherapy. The review aims to identify current gaps in the evidence base and inform how future research, practice and policy may develop and foster inclusive strategies and approaches which will support the psychological well-being of disabled clients accessing counselling and psychotherapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The undertaking and reporting of the proposed scoping review will be guided by the framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Systematic searches of the PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, EBSCO and Cochrane Library electronic databases will be conducted. Reference lists of relevant studies will be reviewed to identify additional studies. Eligible studies will be limited to those published from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2022 and in the English language. Empirical studies involving disabled individuals receiving and/or who have received a form of therapeutic intervention will be included. Data will be extracted, collated and charted, and will be summarised quantitatively through descriptive numerical analysis and qualitatively through a narrative synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The proposed scoping review of published research will not require ethical approval. Results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.