ArticleBMC health services research2026
Challenges in accessing and implementing innovative interventions in occupational therapy.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to identify the main barriers to accessing and implementing innovative treatment approaches in occupational therapy from the perspectives of expert practitioners.
methodsA descriptive and cross-sectional design was adopted using the Delphi method. Twenty expert occupational therapists in Türkiye, each with at least two years of clinical experience, participated in the first round, while 17 completed the second round. Data were collected through two rounds of online questionnaires. In the first round, participants responded to open-ended questions, and their answers were analyzed using content analysis to generate themes. In the second round, these themes were rated on a 7-point Likert scale to assess the level of consensus among participants.
resultsA total of 67 distinct statements were collected in the first round and synthesized into seven themes. In the second round, the highest level of consensus was reached on high training costs, therapists’ lack of knowledge, and difficulties in accessing technology and equipment. Conversely, themes such as lack of standardized protocols, regulatory compliance issues, and insufficient multidisciplinary collaboration showed lower levels of agreement.
conclusionThe findings indicate that limited technological infrastructure, restricted accessibility, high educational costs, and absence of standardized guidelines are the primary barriers to the clinical integration of innovative interventions in occupational therapy. Addressing these barriers is critical to promoting technology-based, client-centered, and evidence-driven practices in the field.
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.