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

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.

The Greek Jefferson Scale of Empathy—Medical Student Version (JSE-S): Psychometric Properties and Its Associated Factors

“…This finding is consistent with the vast majority of prior studies. Many studies conducted across various cultures reported statistically significant differences in overall empathy scores between male and female students and confirmed that female medical students are more empathetic than their male counterparts [ 10 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 25 , 29 , 33 , 37 , 55 , 57 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 76 , 83 , 84 , 89 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 ]. As mentioned above, this discrepancy changes across the academic years.…”

“…Archer and Turner (in South Africa) found that “The mean JSE was 109.98 (SD = 12.54), which is lower than most internationally reported scores” [ 96 ]. Yi et al (in China) found that “The total mean was 104.66 (SD = 13.09), and scores ranged from 39 to 137” [ 97 ]. Shaheen et al (in Pakistan) found that “overall mean empathy level was 90.63 ± 11.55” [ 98 ].…”

“…Archer and Turner (in South Africa) found that “The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.81” [ 96 ]. Yi et al (in China) found that Cronbach’s alpha their study was 0.82 [ 97 ]. Jung et al (in Korea) found that “the reliability of the Korean JSE-S was 0.910 by Cronbach α coefficient” [ 102 ].…”

“…Tiwari (in India) conducted a study states, "The arithmetic mean (±SD) of empathy scores was 99.87 ± 14.71"[101].Wen et al (in China) found that the mean empathy score was 109.60 (SD = 12.09)[94].Mostafa et al (in Bangladesh) found that "The mean empathy score was 110.41 ± 13.59"[95]. Archer and Turner (in South Africa) found that "The mean JSE was 109.98 (SD = 12.54), which is lower than most internationally reported scores"[96].Yi et al (in China) found that "The total mean was 104.66 (SD = 13.09), and scores ranged from 39 to 137"[97].Shaheen et al (in Pakistan) found that "overall mean empathy level was 90.63 ± 11.55" [98]. Nasiri et al (in Iran) "the total mean score of empathy was 98.15 ± 13.29" [99].…”

Empathy in undergraduate medical students: a multi-center cross-sectional study in China

“…Also, most studies found that medical students who preferred a people-oriented specialty had significantly higher empathy scores [ 9 , 13 , 20 ]. Besides, age, parent educational level, race and ethnicity and caring behaviors also were predictors of medical students’ empathy [ 22 , 23 ]. The empathy of medical students in China has been investigated by some studies already [ 22 , 24 , 25 ], but depths of these studies were not enough, and the sample sizes were limited.…”