MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196882936 · doi:10.3138/jvme-2021-0048

Empathy Levels among Veterinary Medicine Students in Colombia (South America)

2021· article· en· W3196882936 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marlyn Hellen Romero Peñuela, Leydy Escobar, Jorge A Sánchez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpathyInterpersonal Reactivity IndexCompetence (human resources)PsychologyAnimal welfareClinical psychologyCurriculumMedicineVeterinary medicineMedical educationPerspective-takingSocial psychologyPedagogyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empathy plays an important role in veterinarians’ relationships with their patients, clients, and colleagues. Because it relates to greater clinical competence and facilitates the acquisition of information for diagnosing, prescribing therapies, and identifying and treating animal pain, empathy is an essential competence to be strengthened during professional training. The objective of this study was to evaluate the empathy levels of veterinary medicine students toward people and animals and to identify associated factors. The animal empathy scale and the Davis interpersonal reactivity index were applied through an electronic survey to first-, third-, and fifth-year students ( n = 559) in three veterinarian medical schools in Colombia. A principal components analysis was performed to identify composite scores of human and animal empathy levels. The empathy toward humans total score ranged from 0 to 112, and the empathy toward animals total score was between 22 and 198. The average empathy scores for students were 89.67 ± 9.02 (mean ± SD; range: 60–115) and 115.01 ± 13.41 (mean ± SD; range: 67–165), respectively. The results suggest that empathy scores toward people are acceptable. Gender, university, program type, age, year of study, and diet were significantly associated with empathy levels toward animals. It is proposed that levels of empathy toward animals be strengthened by fostering a positive learning environment, developing ethical and animal welfare competencies, and increasing empathetic contact and hands-on experience with animals during the curriculum.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207