ArticleJMIR research protocols2025
Paving the Road for More Ethical and Equitable Policies and Practices in Telerehabilitation in Psychology and Neuropsychology: Protocol for a Rapid Review.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. 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.
- Traumatic Brain Injury: Novel Experimental Approaches and Treatment Possibilities.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVirtual rehabilitation, or telerehabilitation (TR), has exponentially evolved in the last few years, gaining particular momentum since the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to a new reality of strict restrictions of physical contact necessitating the shift from in-person health services to tele-health visits, TR has seen widespread adoption. In this context, ensuring ethical and equitable TR services is crucial for establishing sustainable TR models for psychology and neuropsychology into health care systems. This requires complete and consistent guidance for clinicians and patients involved.
objectiveThe objective of this study is to synthesize existing evidence to provide timely insights on potential ethical and equitable benefits and pitfalls associated with the use of TR in a psychological and neuropsychological framework.
methodsA rapid review of TR practices will be conducted specifically within the context of neuropsychology and psychology rehabilitation. We will include review articles published between 2010 and 2020 as well as original articles published between 2020 and 2023, all addressing TR issues with a main focus on neuropsychological and/or psychological rehabilitation activities. This research protocol describes the methodology, including search strategy, screening process, data extraction, and analysis methods.
resultsGuided by an experienced librarian, the search strategy was designed and performed in 3 relevant databases. Articles were screened in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were collected by 2 independent reviewers. Data extraction is underway, and we expect to complete the rapid review in January 2025.
conclusionsThis study is part of a broader cross-Canadian initiative aimed at informing policy development and clinical practices in TR. By evaluating the ethical and equitable considerations specific to psychology and neuropsychology, this review aims to contribute to help shape future TR practices to ensure access to high-quality, accessible TR services supporting diverse patient needs in psychology and neuropsychology. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/66639.
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.