ArticleClinical psychology & psychotherapy
The Use of Routine Outcome Monitoring in Clinical Supervision: A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence.
Article in Clinical psychology & psychotherapy. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) has been recognized for its potential to enhance treatment outcomes and support decision-making. This scoping review aimed to systematically map the empirical literature on the use of ROM in clinical and/or training supervision contexts, to summarize the main findings and to identify research gaps. This scoping review also aimed to provide recommendations for future research. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a systematic search of electronic databases (Scopus, PsycINFO, PubMed, MedLine and Embase) was conducted in March 2025. Studies were included if they reported empirical data on the use of patient-reported outcome or process measures within supervision. No restrictions were placed on population or methodology. A narrative synthesis was adopted due to heterogeneity among studies. Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria, varying in methodology, sample and focus. Four key thematic areas emerged: Experiences and Perceived Benefits to Using ROM in Clinical Supervision; Barriers to Using ROM in Clinical Supervision; Effects of ROM on Clinical Outcomes; and Supervisor Training in the use of ROM. While the use of ROM in supervision is promising, current empirical evidence remains fragmented. Key research priorities to inform clinical training and supervisory practice are discussed.
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.