PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2026
Developing a taxonomy of supportive psychotherapy techniques: Protocol for a systematic review and qualitative content analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Omiya Yuki, Chen Chong, Imai Hissei, Hishiyama Masahiro, Nakau Mariko, Matsuda Takeshi, Hashioka Sadayuki
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Supportive psychotherapy (SP) is widely practiced, yet its constituent techniques have never been systematically identified or classified. Authors and manuals describe overlapping but non-identical sets in varying terminology, and the boundary between SP and supportive-expressive psychotherapy (SEP) remains unclear, impeding training, research, and comparison. This review aims to identify and classify supportive techniques across the SP and SEP literature and develop a consolidated taxonomy, mapping SEP-specific expressive techniques separately to clarify the supportive-expressive boundary.
METHODS: This systematic review protocol, applying qualitative content analysis across study designs, follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). We will search MEDLINE (PubMed), APA PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase from inception, with backward and forward citation searches. Eligible sources are peer-reviewed publications of any design describing at least one specific SP or SEP technique, plus prespecified key texts and manuals. Two reviewers will independently screen, extract data at source and technique levels (verbatim), and appraise quality with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools. Qualitative content analysis will consolidate synonymous descriptions and build the taxonomy through a hybrid inductive-deductive approach.
RESULTS: We expect to produce a consolidated, hierarchically organized taxonomy of supportive techniques, with a boundary mapping of SEP-specific expressive techniques and a characterization of consensus and divergence across both literatures.
CONCLUSIONS: Such a taxonomy would provide a common language for clinicians and researchers, support precise specification of SP in trials, and facilitate structured training.
METHODS: This systematic review protocol, applying qualitative content analysis across study designs, follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). We will search MEDLINE (PubMed), APA PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase from inception, with backward and forward citation searches. Eligible sources are peer-reviewed publications of any design describing at least one specific SP or SEP technique, plus prespecified key texts and manuals. Two reviewers will independently screen, extract data at source and technique levels (verbatim), and appraise quality with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools. Qualitative content analysis will consolidate synonymous descriptions and build the taxonomy through a hybrid inductive-deductive approach.
RESULTS: We expect to produce a consolidated, hierarchically organized taxonomy of supportive techniques, with a boundary mapping of SEP-specific expressive techniques and a characterization of consensus and divergence across both literatures.
CONCLUSIONS: Such a taxonomy would provide a common language for clinicians and researchers, support precise specification of SP in trials, and facilitate structured training.