ArticleBMC medical education2025
Exploring how surgeons employ empathy in clinical practice: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
introductionEmotions are key factors in surgical disease and treatment, both in the surgeon and in the patient. Despite the recognition of the value of clinician empathy (Michalec and Hafferty, Soc Theory Health STH 20: 1–19, 2021), quantitative studies have shown that surgeons have lower empathy scores than other specialities (Walocha, et al., Folia Med Cracov 53:35–42, 2013, Hojat, Med Educ 52:456–7, 2018, Tariq, et al., J Coll Physicians Surg--Pak JCPSP 58:310–3, 2018). The reason for this is unclear, and little is known about how surgeons manage emotions in clinical settings. This study explored the role of empathy in surgical treatment and how surgeons respond to patient emotions, with the aim of creating a theory to explain this clinical process.
methodsWe used an exploratory qualitative study in the Constructivist Grounded Theory tradition, utilising online individual semi-structured interviews with fourteen general surgeons.
resultsSurgeons described multiple discrete approaches to patients’ emotions. Participants were conscious of modulating their emotional response to patients depending on need, and systemic factors like urgency and setting. General approaches to patient emotions included emotion-facing and emotion-avoidant strategies. While the approach used was often tailored to the situation, surgeons usually had a preferred style. The degree of emotional engagement was particularly influenced by time available, and urgency. Participants described some techniques to influence the degree of emotional involvement, primarily by altering consultation times.
conclusionsThe management of emotions by surgeons is nuanced and affected by contextual factors. Management is not entirely automatic or subconscious, but opportunities can be created or limited by the surgeon as required to facilitate effective treatment. The results offer a new perspective on surgeon empathy in the context of the limited existing literature.
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.