Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35585622›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2022

Compassion in healthcare: an updated scoping review of the literature.

Sydney Malenfant, Priya Jaggi, K Alix Hayden, Shane Sinclair

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
45.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

99 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 179 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. From 'Little Things' to 'Seagulls': A Mixed Methods Exploration of Patients' Experiences of Person-Centred Compassionate Care in General Medical and Surgical Wards.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Further Development and Validation of a Measure of Compassionate Healthcare in Action.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Self-Compassion of Nurses Working in Pediatric Hospitals.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Virtual Care and Compassion for Migrants and Refugees: A Scoping Review.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2026
    Review

39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sydney MalenfantCompassion Research Lab, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada.
Priya JaggiCompassion Research Lab, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada.
K Alix HaydenLibraries and Cultural Resources, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Shane SinclairCompassion Research Lab, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada. sinclair@ucalgary.ca.
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA previous review on compassion in healthcare (1988-2014) identified several empirical studies and their limitations. Given the large influx and the disparate nature of the topic within the healthcare literature over the past 5 years, the objective of this study was to provide an update to our original scoping review to provide a current and comprehensive map of the literature to guide future research and to identify gaps and limitations that remain unaddressed.

methodsEight electronic databases along with the grey literature were searched to identify empirical studies published between 2015 and 2020. Of focus were studies that aimed to explore compassion within the clinical setting, or interventions or educational programs for improving compassion, sampling clinicians and/or patient populations. Following title and abstract review, two reviewers independently screened full-text articles, and performed data extraction. Utilizing a narrative synthesis approach, data were mapped onto the categories, themes, and subthemes that were identified in the original review. Newly identified categories were discussed among the team until consensus was achieved.

resultsOf the 14,166 number of records identified, 5263 remained after removal of duplicates, and 50 articles were included in the final review. Studies were predominantly conducted in the UK and were qualitative in design. In contrast to the original review, a larger number of studies sampled solely patients (n = 12), and the remainder focused on clinicians (n = 27) or a mix of clinicians and other (e.g. patients and/or family members) (n = 11). Forty-six studies explored perspectives on the nature of compassion or compassionate behaviours, traversing six themes: nature of compassion, development of compassion, interpersonal factors related to compassion, action and practical compassion, barriers and enablers of compassion, and outcomes of compassion. Four studies reported on the category of educational or clinical interventions, a notable decrease compared to the 10 studies identified in the original review.

conclusionsSince the original scoping review on compassion in healthcare, while a greater number of studies incorporated patient perspectives, clinical or educational interventions appeared to be limited. More efficacious and evidence-based interventions or training programs tailored towards improving compassion for patients in healthcare is required.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareEmpathyHumansCompassionHealthcareHealthcare providersInterventionPatientsScoping review

Identifiers

PMID35585622
PMCPMC9116004
OpenAlexW4280529274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.