ArticlePloS one2026
Situated generosity in clinical care: A mixed-methods study of STI services in China.
Article in PloS one, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGenerosity is a critical yet understudied dimension of prosocial behavior in healthcare. Existing research has focused on individual traits or professional values, with limited attention to how generosity is shaped in everyday clinical contexts. This study examines how healthcare professionals in China understand and enact generosity in sexually transmitted infection (STI) services, and how it is shaped by relational and organizational conditions.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 27 healthcare professionals and a focus group with four participants across five hospitals in Guangdong Province, China. Thematic analysis explored clinicians' understandings and experiences of generosity. Crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (csQCA) examined configurations of relational and organizational conditions associated with reported generous practices. Data were analyzed using NVivo 12 and csQCA 4.0. Given uniform outcome presence, findings are interpreted as descriptive configurational patterns rather than causal effects.
resultsParticipants described generosity as discretionary practices beyond formal duties, including emotional support, flexible scheduling, and financial accommodations. These practices were associated with patient trust and collegial support, but also with emotional strain and boundary tensions in resource-constrained settings. Generosity was more often described in accounts involving clinicians' engagement with patients' broader social circumstances and experiences of supportive team environments. Overall, generosity appeared as a context-dependent practice shaped by interacting relational and organizational conditions.
conclusionGenerosity in STI care appears as a relationally embedded practice shaped by interactions among clinicians, patients, and organizational environments. It reflects the coupling of relational dynamics and institutional conditions that simultaneously enable and constrain discretionary care. Sustaining situated generosity therefore depends less on individual motivation than on organizational infrastructures that structure relational work in clinical settings.
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.