SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2025
The effects of clinical supervision on supervisees and patient outcomes in psychotherapy - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- The Use of Routine Outcome Monitoring in Clinical Supervision: A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence.Clinical psychology & psychotherapyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Supervisions and case consultations are an essential and often required part of psychotherapeutic training. Despite its importance and ubiquitous use, research is limited, and no quantitative review is yet available. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides an overview of empirical literature on clinical supervision and investigates its effectiveness regarding various outcomes (PROSPERO CRD42024574318). Method: We conducted a comprehensive literature search up to June 16 Results: 32 studies met the inclusion criteria of which 13 studies could be included in meta-analyses for the outcomes on therapists' competence, therapeutic alliance and patients' symptoms. Supervision interventions yielded a small but non-significant effect on symptom reduction in patients favoring the respective supervision interventions. There was a small effect on therapists' competence and medium effect on therapeutic alliance, which both were non-significant, yet large and significant when compared with passive controls. Regarding the studies included in the review, supervision was mostly reported to have a beneficial effect on therapists' competence, alliance and patients' symptoms, while the effects on therapists' adherence were heterogeneous. Conclusion: These results highlight promising effects of supervision and the need for further investigation of different supervision models. Further research is needed to examine the effectiveness of supervision and investigate potential moderating factors. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024574318.
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.