On the proliferation of the empathy concept in healthcare and medical education research

Abstract

ObjectiveTo offer a critique of empathy concept usage in healthcare and medical education research. MethodsAnalysis of current usage and suggestions for authors and researchers. ResultsEmpathy is often undefined or inconsistently defined, and “empathy” as represented in research covers an unmanageably wide and varied range of intentions, attitudes, emotions, and behaviors. The ubiquitous use of “empathy” as a vague and often undefined umbrella term hinders comprehension and, therefore, scientific progress. Patients are rarely asked directly about empathy; instead, measures of so-called perceived empathy contain descriptive items that could as well be called quality of care, patient-centeredness, or patient satisfaction. Conclusions: Although “empathy” in medical care is widely valued by researchers, educators, and practitioners, the empathy concept as used in the published literature is overused and unclear, and potentially damaging to scholarship, medical education, and ultimately healthcare. The vague term empathy should be replaced as much as possible with concrete descriptions of what is actually measured, experimentally manipulated, or taught. Practice implicationsIdentifying patients’ own empathy definitions will improve medical education and medical care through clarifying what clinical behaviors will best fulfill patients’ needs and desires. This approach allows for greater specificity and personalized care delivery.