SynthesisFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2026
Comparison of group and individual therapy in physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This review aimed to determine the effects of (digital) group therapies in comparison to individual therapies within physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy. Methods: Embase, PubMed and Web of Science were searched until May 2025. RoB 2 and GRADE were used to rate the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence. Mean differences were used to analyze differences between group and individual therapy. Results: Eleven studies were included in this review (eight of physiotherapy, two of speech therapy, and one of occupational therapy). The studies cover various diseases and exhibit a high degree of heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes. For 67 of the 76 outcomes, no significant differences were reported between group and individual therapy post-intervention. Group therapy showed better results in five outcomes, individual therapy showed better results in four outcomes. Three studies raised some concerns, and eight studies showed a high overall risk of bias. Certainty grading was (very) low for all outcomes. Discussion: This review found no clear evidence favoring either group or individual therapy in therapeutic services. The evidence's derivation from heterogeneous low-quality studies with small sample sizes necessitates a careful interpretation of the results. Further research is needed to validate these findings.
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.