Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42283877›Full record

ArticleJournal of community genetics2026

Proxy patients' perceptions of genetic counselor empathy responses.

Jennine Bouchard, Ian MacFarlane, Patricia McCarthy Veach, Janice A Baker, Krista Redlinger-Grosse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jennine BouchardDepartment of Biochemistry and Medical Genetics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Ian MacFarlaneDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, Institute of Human Genetics, University of Minnesota, 6-160 Jackson Hall, 321 Church St SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0896-1952
Patricia McCarthy VeachUniversity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5563-8541
Janice A BakerChildren's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA.
Krista Redlinger-GrosseDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, Institute of Human Genetics, University of Minnesota, 6-160 Jackson Hall, 321 Church St SE, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA. redli009@umn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9051-1693

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Empathy, the ability to understand and communicate another's experience to them, positively affects genetic counseling processes and outcomes. Genetic counseling, a specialty healthcare profession, provides education and support for those impacted by genetic disease; thus, empathy is critical. Limited studies have explored patients' perceptions of genetic counselor (GC) empathy responses. This study investigated the types of GC responses proxy patients perceived as most empathic and why. Female MTurk workers (n = 198) completed a survey containing two hypothetical genetic counseling scenarios (Fabry disease; postnatal diagnosis of cleft lip and palate) that ended with a patient statement followed by five different GC responses. Participants were asked to identify the GC response that best conveyed empathy and explain their choice. Every GC response was selected by at least one participant. Inductive content analysis of participants' rationales yielded six categories: Understanding, Problem Solving, Sympathizing, Focusing on the Patient, Validating, and Miscellaneous. Understanding was the most prevalent rationale for both scenarios (~ 50% each). While GC responses containing the words "I'm sorry…" were chosen most often for both scenarios (~ 45% each), Sympathizing was the rationale for only ~ 20% of these GC responses. Logistic regression analyses showed significant predictors varied across scenarios and between rationales, with few significant demographic predictors. Participants differed in preferences for empathy statements and rationales, signaling context and tailoring are important when considering empathy. Patient demographics are not recommended in predicting the type of GC patients may find empathic. Ongoing assessment of patients' feelings and needs (empathic resonance) will allow genetic counselors to tailor their empathy communication (expressed empathy) accordingly.

Indexed as

Counseling skillsEmpathyGenetic counselingPatient perception

Identifiers

PMID42283877
PMCPMC13263356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.