ArticleAfrican journal of psychological assessment2025
Medical practitioner compassion: Development and validation of a compassion competency questionnaire.
Article in African journal of psychological assessment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a need for a psychometrically robust questionnaire measuring medical practitioner compassion in healthcare. Without such a measure, competence on this construct cannot be assessed, nor can the effectiveness of interventions designed to enhance compassion be determined. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a self-assessment measure of medical practitioner compassion competence (the Medical Practitioner Compassion Competency Questionnaire [MPCCQ]). The MPCCQ was administered to a sample of 234 medical practitioners in South Africa. They represented three healthcare system levels, namely, the primary level (healthcare centres and clinics), the secondary level (district and regional hospitals) and the tertiary level (central, specialised and sub-specialist hospitals). The quantitative data were analysed with statistical packages, namely, Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25 and LISREL 8.8, and structural equation modelling was used to fit the MPCCQ measurement model and structural model. Dimensionality and item analyses returned generally positive results. Fit statistics and criteria used to judge the fit of the models included Chi-square (χ Contribution: The statistical evidence generated thus far failed to refute the position that the MPCCQ shows construct validity, thus paving the way for the cautious utilisation of the instrument in healthcare and medical education institutions.
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.