“There’s no billing code for empathy” - Animated comics remind medical students of empathy: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physician empathy is associated with improved diabetes outcomes. However, empathy declines throughout medical school training. This study seeks to describe how comics on diabetes affect learning processes for empathy in medical students. METHODS: All first- or second-year students at a Canadian medical school were invited to provide written reflections on two comics regarding diabetes and participate in a focus group. Responses were analyzed qualitatively for emergent themes. Students completed the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE) at baseline, after the comic, and after the focus group. Linear mixed model statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Thirteen first-year and 12 second-year students participated. Qualitative analysis revealed four themes: 1) Empathy decline and its barriers; 2) Impact of the comic and focus group on knowledge, attitudes and skills; 3) Role of the comic in the curriculum as a reminder tool of the importance of empathy; 4) Comics as an effective medium. Baseline mean JSPE scores were 116.4 (SD 10.5) and trended up to 117.2 (SD 12.5) and 119.6 (SD 15.2) after viewing the comics and participating in the focus groups, respectively (p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Animated comics on diabetes are novel methods of reminding students about empathy by highlighting the patient perspective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".