ArticleDigital health
A comparative study of patient-physician empathy in telehealth and traditional in-person visits.
Article in Digital health. 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.
- Policy Considerations for National Virtual Hospitals: Global Evidence and the Seha Virtual Hospital Model.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Designing Artificial Intelligence Tools to Strengthen Human Connection in Healthcare: The CoCo Experience.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Physicians' Perceptions of AI and Extended Reality in Telemedicine: A Multi-Specialty Cross-Sectional Survey in Romania.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The rise of telemedicine has brought significant changes to patient care, especially regarding the experience of empathy and connection during consultations. Understanding how telemedicine compares to in-person visits in terms of patient-physician interactions and the perception of empathy is crucial for optimizing telehealth services. Objectives: This study aims to compare patient-physician interaction ratings between telemedicine and in-person visits across the 10 items of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure. Additionally, it seeks to identify any significant differences in interaction ratings between male and female patients within these contexts. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 320 participants who had either telemedicine or in-person consultations. Participants were assigned to the telehealth or in-person group based on the type of consultation they experienced. The CARE measure was utilized to capture patient's perspective of the quality of the interaction. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the ratings between the two groups. Results: The study found no significant differences in overall CARE measure ratings between telemedicine and in-person visits. However, male patients reported higher satisfaction with telemedicine on several items compared to in-person visits, whereas female patients showed no significant differences in their ratings. Conclusions: Telemedicine is as effective as in-person visits in maintaining high-quality patient-physician interactions. The findings also suggest gender-specific preferences that could inform the optimization of telemedicine practices. Further research is recommended to explore these differences in more diverse populations.
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.