(PS8-51) Who's in? And what about who's out?: A Meta-Analytic Assessment of Representation in VCT versus In-Person Alliance and Satisfaction Research

This poster examines demographic reporting practices and cultural representation in studies comparing videoconferencing therapy (VCT) and in-person therapy, with specific focus on therapeutic alliance and satisfaction outcomes. Using Pamela Hays' ADDRESSING framework (Age, Disability, Religion, Ethnicity, Socioeconomic status, Sexual orientation, Indigenous heritage, National origin, Gender), we analyze which cultural identity domains are reported and which cultural identity domains are omitted within this literature.

Our meta-analytic sample derives from a pre-registered systematic review of VCT versus in-person comparative studies. Using a comprehensive search strategy (7 primary search terms across 7 databases), we identified 59 studies meeting inclusion criteria. A second search to focus on studies published since the start of the initial search is underway and full analyses are expected before May 2025. For each study, we will code whether that study reported elements of each ADDRESSING domain and we will extract percentages for reported populations.

Preliminary analyses based on the initial search suggest variation in demographic reporting completeness across the ADDRESSING framework. While basic demographics (age, gender, ethnicity) appear in many studies, other crucial cultural identities (remain severely underreported. This gap is particularly concerning for videoconferencing research, as digital access is intended to increase engagement for persons of all identities, including those historically, or presently, marginalized.

Our poster will present: (1) Ranked frequencies of reporting for each ADDRESSING domain, highlighting the most neglected aspects of cultural identity; (2) Comparison of reporting practices between VCT and in-person studies; and (3) Representation ratios comparing reported demographics to US Census benchmarks.

This research addresses a critical gap in understanding who is represented—and who is missing—in the evidence base for telehealth alliance and satisfaction. Findings have direct implications for the ethical delivery of evidence-based telehealth services to diverse populations and align with ABCT's strategic goal of enhancing the scientific understanding of human problems through evidence-based principles that serve diverse stakeholders.