ArticleBMJ open2026
Impact of emotional competence on clinical reasoning: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesGiven the role of emotions in reasoning, we hypothesised that emotional competence (EC), defined as the ability to identify, understand, express, regulate and use emotions, would increase the quality of physician's clinical reasoning (CR). The objectives of this study were to map the existing literature on the impact of EC on physician's CR and to identify any literature gaps.
designThis study is a scoping review. DATA SOURCES: We included articles from Medline (via Ovid), Embase and Psychinfo and articles found manually, with no limitations in terms of publication date or location. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were all physicians and medical students and articles focusing on one or more dimensions of EC (based on the model of Mikolajczak DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Results were summarised using descriptive analyses and a narrative synthesis.
resultsAfter removing duplicates, we identified 12 046 articles. Following a review of their titles and abstracts, we assessed 268 articles for eligibility and included 98 in the scoping review. Most studies examined the effects of emotional regulation strategies, empathy and global EC scores on clinical performance. Positive effects of EC on uncertainty management and intuitive reasoning have been well documented, as have its effects on diagnostic and therapeutic performance and the development of CR in the context of life-threatening situations. A smaller number of studies suggest a favourable impact on clinical performance in the surgical context and on the quality of prescriptions. The impact of EC on diagnostic and therapeutic performance outside emergency and intraoperative contexts and on patient outcomes remains uncertain. The effects of EC on CR were most evident under conditions of high acute stress, likely due to the increased cognitive load associated with such conditions.
conclusionsEC has been found to have a positive impact on CR mainly when dealing with uncertainty and life-threatening emergencies. Stress regulation and the resulting reduction in cognitive load appear to be a key modulator of EC's impact on CR. Further research should focus on the impact of EC on diagnostic and therapeutic performance outside emergency conditions and on patient outcomes.
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.