MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416554655 · doi:10.1002/hsr2.71305

The Reliability and Validity of Chinese Version of JSPE‐HP Among Doctors From Primary‐Level Clinics: A Cross‐Sectional Study

2025· article· en· W4416554655 on OpenAlexaff
Shumin Mai, Hongmei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)EmpathyScale (ratio)ValidityPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Aims: Primary-level clinics play an important role in providing healthcare services and maintaining citizens' health in China. However, there is limited research on empathy among Chinese doctors in primary care settings. We will translate the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy for physicians and health professional (JSPE-HP) into Chinese and evaluate its reliability and validity among doctors from primary-level clinics and the condition of doctor empathy will also be evaluated. Methods: Two research assistants, fluent in both English and Chinese, were invited to evaluate our translation of the JSPE-HP. From April to July in 2023, a cross-sectional survey was then administered to a convenience sample of 459 doctors from primary-level clinics in Zhejiang Province, China. The quality of the scale was tested using internal consistency reliability, composite reliability (CR), and convergent and discriminant validity. Results: The Chinese version of the JSPE-HP scale comprises 20 items across three dimensions. The scale had an overall Cronbach's α of 0.85, and the CRs of the three dimensions were 0.88, 0.81 and 0.74 respectively, indicating satisfactory reliability. Average variance extracted ranged from 0.43 to 0.59 and the Chi-squared difference between the constrained and free models was significant, indicating convergent and discriminant validity. The mean total score for the doctors was 110.52 (SD = 15.80). It was 75.43 after transformation. Conclusion: The reliability and validity of the scale is acceptable, and it could serve as an evaluation tool for doctors of Chinese background. The empathy level of doctors from primary-level clinics should be improved further.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Science ReportsSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207