ReviewInquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
One Psychology Profession, Many Standards: A Narrative Review of Training, Licensing, and Practice Standards and Their Implications for International Mobility.
Review in Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bridging the service gap in cognitive behavioral therapy from a user perspective: Findings from a web-based survey in Japan.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This narrative review paper contrasts the professional prospects of psychologists in Japan and the U.S., discussing how divergent training, licensing, and practice standards appear to influence psychologists' profession in each country. Licensed psychologists in the U.S. practice with significant autonomy, which can be seen as a reflection of rigorous training requirements. In contrast, certified public psychologists in Japan complete a shorter-duration training regimen yet encounter more restrictive professional standards and greater financial challenges. These varying standards often create barriers to professional practice that impact psychologists on a global scale. Limited international mobility restricts opportunities for psychologists to learn abroad, exchange knowledge, and deliver culturally sensitive care to diverse populations, despite the need for such services among foreign individuals or immigrants in both countries. Furthermore, these disparities impede broader collaborative efforts to address global mental health challenges. Aligning training and licensing standards globally could enhance psychologists' international mobility, ensure consistent quality of care, and foster global collaboration. This alignment could improve access to culturally sensitive psychological services and help bridge the mental health care gap worldwide. This review emphasizes the necessity of further cross-cultural comparisons to understand the impact of training and licensing standards on clinical practice quality and accessibility. By presenting this comparative analysis, the study aims to inspire similar efforts, promoting global licensing reciprocity and the integration of professional psychology in an increasingly interconnected world.
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.