Psychotherapy training in psychiatry: a systematic review and narrative synthesis on the supervision experiences of early-career psychiatrists.
BACKGROUND: Supervision is a fundamental component of psychotherapy training, transforming theoretical knowledge into clinical skills through real-world practice. Psychotherapy training practices vary widely between countries, training programs, and over time, including supervision. Our systematic review aimed to investigate and describe the experiences of psychotherapy supervision through early-career psychiatrists' (ECPs) views. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and PubPsych for survey-based studies on ECPs' experiences of psychotherapy supervision during or after their psychiatry training and reported our findings according to the PRISMA guidelines. Of 32,877 articles screened, 29 articles were included. Each article underwent quality assessment, and results were synthesized narratively. RESULTS: Included articles published between 2000 and 2025, were from Europe (N = 16, 55.1%), the Americas (N = 5, 17.2%), Western Pacific (N = 4, 13.7%), South-East Asia (N = 2, 7%), Eastern Mediterranean (N = 1, 3.5%), and Africa (N = 1, 3.5%), with a total of 4691 participants. Supervision access rates ranged from 26.2% in Nigeria to 85.5% in Russia, with significant variation across countries and psychotherapy modalities. Most ECPs received 50-100 total hours of supervision, frequently delivered in weekly sessions. While formats, individual, group, or mixed, varied by country and training scheme, supervision was generally provided by a psychiatrist-psychotherapist. Common learning techniques included oral consultations and case discussions, followed by audio recordings or transcripts. The need to self-fund psychotherapy supervision costs was identified as a prominent barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Psychotherapy supervision is inconsistent globally, with barriers including supervisor availability and cost. There is a large implementation gap between recommendations and evaluated practice. Digital tools and competency-based frameworks may improve access and quality.