SynthesisBMJ open2026
Arts-based empathy education in healthcare: a critical systematic review of pedagogical mechanisms and evidence gaps.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 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.
- Educational and Professional Development Interventions to Strengthen Empathy, Compassion, and Relational Care Among Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Review.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026Review
- Melody of genes: design and implementation of an interdisciplinary medical humanities course to enhance empathy, humanistic literacy, and professional identity in Chinese medical students.BMC medical education · 2026Article
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
objectivesTo systematically identify and synthesise the pedagogical mechanisms through which arts-based interventions (theatre, poetry, narrative medicine) may support empathy development in healthcare learners, while critically appraising the contextual implementation factors and methodological limitations of the existing evidence base.
designSystematic review with narrative synthesis, conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science Core Collection and CINAHL Plus, from inception to 31 August 2025. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Peer-reviewed empirical studies involving undergraduate or postgraduate healthcare students or professionals. Eligible studies reported on arts-based educational interventions designed to enhance empathy (including theatre, poetry or narrative medicine) and included quantitative or qualitative outcome measures of empathy or related constructs. No restrictions were placed on study design. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data on intervention characteristics and outcomes, and assessed methodological quality using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tools. A narrative synthesis was conducted to examine patterns across intervention modalities. Effect sizes (Cohen's
resultsFrom 1094 records screened, 17 studies involving 835 participants (median sample size=28) met inclusion criteria. There were eight theatre-based, five poetry-based and four narrative medicine interventions. Theatre interventions, which emphasised embodied learning, showed patterns of large empathy effects (mean d=0.83). Poetry interventions, focusing on reflective practice, showed patterns of moderate effects (mean d=0.49). One study of narrative medicine demonstrated a pattern of sustained gains at 2-year follow-up (d=0.82). Key limitations of the evidence base include small sample sizes, substantial measurement heterogeneity (12 different empathy instruments), geographical bias (88% of studies from high-income, Western countries), and a predominance of pre-post study designs.
conclusionsArts-based interventions show mechanism-specific patterns of potential benefit for empathy in healthcare learners. However, significant methodological limitations in the current evidence constrain definitive practice recommendations. Educators may consider piloting brief, facilitator-led interventions based on local resources, while acknowledging the need for more robust evidence. Future research must prioritise standardised outcome measures, rigorous controlled and longitudinal trial designs, and studies in diverse cultural contexts. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42025116174.
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.