ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2025
Patient and Practitioner Perspectives on the Definition and Measurement of Therapeutic Empathy: Qualitative Study.
Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Living the Masterclass: Multiple Sclerosis Patient Journeys and the Reality of Participatory Medicine.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Validity and reliability of the 2-item version compared with the 10-item version of the Japanese consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure: primary analysis of a cross-sectional survey.BMC primary care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Most definitions of therapeutic empathy are based on practitioners' perspectives, and few account for patients' views. Therefore, we do not understand what therapeutic empathy means to patients. Given that therapeutic empathy involves a relationship between patients and practitioners, the underrepresentation of the patient voice threatens to undermine the validity of therapeutic empathy definitions and subsequently, how the concept is measured, taught, and practiced. Objective: The aim of the study is to explore the perspectives of patients and practitioners on the definition of therapeutic empathy and how it should therefore be measured. Methods: A qualitative study, underpinned by a social constructivist stance, was conducted. Patients and practitioners were purposively sampled from a medical school and a school of health care to represent a diversity of lived experiences and health care professions. In-depth, semistructured interviews were undertaken, and the data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Data collection ceased upon reaching meaning saturation. Results: In total, 16 participants (8 patients and 8 practitioners) were interviewed in June and July 2024. Reflexive thematic analysis generated three overarching themes that synthesize the views of patients and practitioners on therapeutic empathy and how it should be measured: (1) therapeutic empathy involves the practitioner showing the patient (that they are interested in the patient as a person, that they are actively listening, that they understand, that they are emotionally engaged, and that they are responding to their needs), (2) context matters (eg, the clinical scenario, time, and the patient), and (3) short, simple scales are a pragmatic approach to measurement. Conclusions: Patients and practitioners have similar views about what empathy is and define therapeutic empathy as involving the practitioner demonstrating specific attitudes and behaviors to their patients. These attitudes and behaviors should be included in interventions to enhance therapeutic empathy and in measures of the concept. However, contextual factors may influence the expression of therapeutic empathy in practice. The findings highlight the need for, and can inform the development of, a short therapeutic empathy scale that allows the comparison of scores between patients, practitioners, students, and observers.
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.