ArticleJMIR formative research2023
Measurement of Humanity Among Health Professionals: Development and Validation of the Medical Humanity Scale Using the Delphi Method.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Syrian Health Care Scale: a novel instrument for assessing physician-delivered care in crisis contexts.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Burnout among Syrian postgraduate residents in medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy: a cross-sectional study.Korean journal of medical education · 2025Article
- The surgical clinical training measurement: developing and evaluating the quality of surgical clinical training among Syrian surgical residents.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Post-quake call for action: developing core competencies matrix for Syrian health workers in emergency time.Conflict and health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the importance of humanism in providing health care, there is a lack of valid and reliable tool for assessing humanity among health professionals.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to design a new humanism scale and to assess the validity of this scale in measuring humanism among Syrian health professional students.
methodsThe Medical Humanity Scale (MHS) was designed. It consists of 27 items categorized into 7 human values including patient-oriented care, respect, empathy, ethics, altruism, and compassion. The scale was tested for internal consistency and reliability using Cronbach α and test-retest methods. The construct validity of the scale was also tested to assess the ability of the scale in differentiating between groups of health professional students with different levels of medical humanity. A 7-point Likert scale was adopted. The study included 300 participants including 97 medical, 78 dental, 82 pharmacy, and 43 preparatory-year students from Syrian universities. The Delphi method was used and factors analysis was performed. Bartlett test of sphericity and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sample adequacy were used. The number of components was extracted using principal component analysis.
resultsThe mean score of the MHS was 158.7 (SD 11.4). The MHS mean score of female participants was significantly higher than the mean score of male participants (159.59, SD 10.21 vs 155.48, SD 14.35; P=.008). The MHS mean score was significantly lower in dental students (154.12, SD 1.45; P=.005) than the mean scores of medical students (159.77, SD 1.02), pharmacy students (161.40, SD 1.05), and preparatory-year students (159.05, SD 1.94). However, no significant relationship was found between humanism and academic year (P=.32), university type (P=.34), marital status (P=.64), or financial situation (P=.16). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test (0.730) and Bartlett test of sphericity (1201.611, df=351; P=.01) were performed. Factor analysis indicated that the proportion of variables between the first and second factors was greater than 10%, confirming that the scale was a single group. The Cronbach α for the overall scale was 0.735, indicating that the scale had acceptable reliability and validity.
conclusionsThe results of this study suggest that the MHS is a reliable and valid tool for measuring humanity among health professional students and the development of patient-centered care.
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.