A multi-institutional and cross-sectional study on empathy in Chinese medical students: Differences by student cadre or not, future career preference, and father's education status

7Citations
Citations of this article
71Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The aims of this study were to examine the factor structure of the Chinese version of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy for medical students (JSE-S) and investigate differences in empathy scores among Chinese medical students according to gender, student cadre or not, future career preference, and parents' education. Methods: Medical students from three universities completed an online questionnaire containing the JSE-S. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine the factor structure, and group comparisons of empathy scores were examined via t-tests and analysis of variance. Results: Four factors emerged from the factor analysis: "perspective taking," "compassionate care," "standing in the patient's shoes," and an uninterpretable factor. The results indicated that students who were female, held positions as student cadres, preferred to become a doctor, and whose fathers had a high school education or below tended to have more empathy. Conclusions: Overall, the findings provide information on the dimensions of empathy applicable to Chinese medical students and confirm the factors found in the original measure. The dimensions have implications for developing empathy among medical students throughout the world. Educators can use the information to design interventions to foster empathy among students in the context of medical education reform in many countries, including China.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yi, K., Kang, M., Li, D., Wang, Z., Bai, J., Xu, H., & Ma, S. (2020). A multi-institutional and cross-sectional study on empathy in Chinese medical students: Differences by student cadre or not, future career preference, and father’s education status. BMC Medical Education, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-1935-x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free