ArticleEvaluation & the health professions2026
Do Physicians CARE? Psychometric Validation of the Portuguese Self-Report Version of the CARE Measure.
Article in Evaluation & the health professions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do Physicians CARE? Psychometric Validation of the Portuguese Self-Report Version of the CARE Measure.Evaluation & the health professions · 2026Article
- 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical empathy is central to the physician-patient relationship, and there is an increasing need for valid and reliable instruments to assess self-reported clinical empathy. Although the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure is widely used in its patient-reported form, it has not been validated for physician self-assessment. This study examined the construct validity and internal consistency of the Portuguese self-report version of the CARE Measure in 221 physicians who completed an online survey. The sample was randomly divided into two subsamples for exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA). Measurement invariance was tested across gender, age, and professional status. Internal consistency, convergent validity, and known-groups validity were also evaluated. EFA revealed a two-factor structure - Cognitive and Affective Empathy - supported by CFA. Measurement invariance was confirmed across gender, age, and professional status. The scale showed good internal consistency for both factors. Convergent validity was indicated by correlations with communication competence and therapeutic relationship quality. Known-groups validity was demonstrated by higher cognitive empathy scores among physicians aged 41 and older and among men. These findings provide robust evidence for the validity and reliability of the Portuguese self-report CARE Measure, supporting its use in clinical training, self-assessment, and empathy research.
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.