ArticleBMJ open2025
How do patient and practitioner characteristics influence empathy in healthcare? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEmpathy is a core component of high-quality care yet is expressed and received in different ways depending on the characteristics (including gender, race, socioeconomic status and disability) of both practitioners and patients. However, the evidence exploring how these characteristics or their overlap ('intersectionality') influence empathy has not been synthesised. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically review and meta-analyse studies exploring the influence of healthcare practitioners and patient characteristics on empathy in healthcare. MEDLINE, EMBASE (via Scopus), Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects will be searched from database inception to present. Reference chasing will be used to identify additional studies. Studies that report empathy levels using either (1) the patient-reported Consultation and Relational Empathy Measure or (2) the practitioner or student-reported Jefferson Scale of Empathy. This will include validated versions or translations of both scales.Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts and extract data using Rayyan. Discrepancies will be resolved in discussion with a third author if necessary. Two independent authors will evaluate the risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute tools.Continuous data will be analysed based on the mean, SD, sample size and 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses will be used to explore the potential impact of risk of bias and use of imputed data. We will explore differences between countries, demographic characteristics, disciplines and lengths of time in practice experience, as well as differences over time (comparing more recent with older studies). We will also explore differences between patient-reported and practitioner-reported empathy.We will report our findings following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and flowchart. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review as primary data will not be collected. The review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presented at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024604677.
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.