• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

骗我一次:与标准化病人互动中的共情错觉。

Fool me once: The illusion of empathy in interactions with standardized patients.

作者信息

Perrella Andrew

机构信息

a Faculty of Medicine , University of Toronto , Toronto , Ontario , Canada.

出版信息

Med Teach. 2016 Dec;38(12):1285-1287. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2016.1210115. Epub 2016 Aug 30.

DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2016.1210115
PMID:27573287
Abstract

Empathy - cultivated through lived experiences - finds itself at the foundation of patient-centered care. Through establishing rapport, medical students learn to acquire unique perspectives of their patients during their training years. Given its basis in cognition, it is generally agreed that empathy is a skill amenable to nurturing, and can thus be evaluated. Unfortunately, when empathy, compassion, and perspective-taking are put under the scrutiny of a standardized examination (e.g. OSCEs - objective structured clinical exams), students find themselves feigning a substandard level of empathy in order to appease their evaluators' criteria. The fact that a standardized clinical encounter is little more than a performance results in both the student and the standardized patient (SP) vying to convince each other that their performances are realistic, and medical students' desire for positive evaluations hinders their ability or willingness to connect authentically with the "patient." Consequently, for many years, medical educators have been faced with a paradox: empathy cannot exist in an inauthentic environment, and if assessment promotes inauthenticity, then it appears that empathy is a quality which cannot be assessed.

摘要

通过生活经历培养出来的同理心是患者中心护理的基础。在培训期间,医学生通过建立融洽的关系,学会从患者的独特视角去了解情况。鉴于同理心基于认知,人们普遍认为它是一种可培养的技能,因此可以进行评估。不幸的是,当同理心、同情心和换位思考在标准化考试(如客观结构化临床考试OSCEs)的审视下时,学生会为了迎合评估标准而假装出不达标的同理心水平。标准化临床接触只不过是一场表演,这导致学生和标准化患者(SP)都试图让对方相信自己的表现是真实的,而医学生对积极评价的渴望阻碍了他们与“患者”真诚建立联系的能力或意愿。因此,多年来,医学教育工作者一直面临着一个悖论:同理心无法在不真实的环境中存在,如果评估助长了不真实性,那么似乎同理心是一种无法评估的品质。

相似文献

1
Fool me once: The illusion of empathy in interactions with standardized patients.骗我一次:与标准化病人互动中的共情错觉。
Med Teach. 2016 Dec;38(12):1285-1287. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2016.1210115. Epub 2016 Aug 30.
2
Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient?医学生对虚拟病人会做出共情反应吗?
Am J Surg. 2007 Jun;193(6):756-60. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.01.021.
3
Empathy integration: a two way street between medical students and standardized patients.同理心整合:医学生与标准化病人之间的双向道路。
Med Teach. 2011;33(5):423-4.
4
Does perspective-taking increase patient satisfaction in medical encounters?换位思考是否能提高医患接触中的患者满意度?
Acad Med. 2010 Sep;85(9):1445-52. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181eae5ec.
5
CARECOS study: Medical students' empathy as assessed with the CARE measure by examiners versus standardized patients during a formative Objective and Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) station.CARECOS 研究:在形成性客观结构化临床考试(OSCE)站中,通过考官和标准化患者使用 CARE 措施评估医学生的同理心。
Med Teach. 2024 Sep;46(9):1187-1195. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2024.2306840. Epub 2024 Jan 29.
6
The effect of using standardized patients or peer role play on ratings of undergraduate communication training: a randomized controlled trial.使用标准化患者或同伴角色扮演对本科沟通培训评估效果的影响:一项随机对照试验。
Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Jun;87(3):300-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.10.007. Epub 2011 Dec 1.
7
Formative feedback from the first-person perspective using Google Glass in a family medicine objective structured clinical examination station in the United States.在美国一家家庭医学客观结构化临床考试站中,使用谷歌眼镜从第一人称视角提供的形成性反馈。
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2018 Mar 7;15:5. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.5. eCollection 2018.
8
Student self-reported communication skills, knowledge and confidence across standardised patient, virtual and traditional clinical learning environments.学生在标准化病人、虚拟和传统临床学习环境中自我报告的沟通技巧、知识和信心。
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Feb 27;16:73. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0577-5.
9
Can simulations measure empathy? Considerations on how to assess behavioral empathy via simulations.模拟能够衡量同理心吗?关于如何通过模拟评估行为同理心的思考。
Patient Educ Couns. 2008 May;71(2):148-52. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.01.003. Epub 2008 Mar 20.
10
First-year medical students' assessment of their own communication skills: a video-based, open-ended approach.一年级医学生对自身沟通技巧的评估:一种基于视频的开放式方法。
Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Oct;68(2):161-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.05.018. Epub 2007 Jul 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Blurring the Line Between Standardized and Real Patients: Twelve Tips for Improving the Authenticity of Standardized Patient Encounters.模糊标准化患者与真实患者之间的界限:提高标准化患者问诊真实性的十二条建议。
Med Sci Educ. 2024 Nov 12;35(2):1017-1024. doi: 10.1007/s40670-024-02220-8. eCollection 2025 Apr.
2
Cognitive empathy variations during internship: a study from Iran.实习期间认知同理心的变化:来自伊朗的一项研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Jul 29;24(1):813. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05813-4.
3
Being kind in unkind spaces: a qualitative examination of how medical educators and first year medical students perceive empathy training.
在不友善的环境中保持友善:对医学教育工作者和医学一年级学生如何看待同理心训练的质性研究
Front Sociol. 2024 Jan 19;8:1272357. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2023.1272357. eCollection 2023.
4
Training Actors' Knowledge of the Lived Experience of People With Advanced Dementia.培养演员对晚期痴呆症患者生活经历的了解。
Gerontol Geriatr Med. 2022 Jun 1;8:23337214221097837. doi: 10.1177/23337214221097837. eCollection 2022 Jan-Dec.