Cited by 65Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsStress and Burnout ResearchHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

Mindfulness Among Genetic Counselors Is Associated with Increased Empathy and Work Engagement and Decreased Burnout and Compassion Fatigue

Silver, Julia, Caleshu, Colleen, Casson‐Parkin, Sylvie, Ormond, Kelly·2018·Journal of Genetic Counseling

Abstract

Genetic counselors experience high rates of compassion fatigue and an elevated risk for burnout, both of which can negatively impact patient care and retention in the profession. In other healthcare professions, mindfulness training has been successfully used to address similar negative psychological sequelae and to bolster empathy, which is the foundation of our counseling work. We aimed to assess associations between mindfulness and key professional variables, including burnout, compassion fatigue, work engagement, and empathy. Data were collected via an anonymous, online survey that included validated measures of mindfulness and these key professional variables. The survey was completed by 441 genetic counselors involved in direct patient care. Half of the respondents (50.1%) reported engaging in yoga, meditation, and/or breathing exercises. Mindfulness was positively correlated with work engagement (r = 0.24, p < 0.001) and empathy (as measured through four subscales: perspective taking (r = 0.15, p = 0.002), empathic concern (r = 0.11, p = 0.03), fantasy (r = - 0.11, p = 0.03) and personal distress (r = - 0.15, p = 0.001)). Mindfulness was negatively correlated with compassion fatigue (r = - 0.48, p < 0.001) and burnout (r = - 0.50, p < 0.001). Given these findings, mindfulness training may be a valuable addition to graduate and continuing education for genetic counselors. The integration of mindfulness into the genetic counseling field will likely improve professional m…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10897-018-0236-6

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 79 · Cited by 65

Authors
Silver, J., Caleshu, C., Casson‐Parkin, S., & Ormond, K.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Caleshu, Colleen
Venue
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-03-04
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
1175-1186
ISSN
  • 1059-7700 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3599
OpenAlex
W2794300908
Cited by
65
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6
FWCI
8.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Genetic Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Stanford University MS Program in Human Genetics and Genetic Counseling ($380)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
mindfulness, genetic counselors, empathy, work engagement, burnout, compassion fatigue, yoga, meditation, perspective taking, empathic concern, personal distress, fantasy, employee retention, professional well-being, continuing education
MeSH terms
Compassion Fatigue, Burnout, Psychological, Adult, Burnout, Professional, Cross-Sectional Studies, Empathy, Female, Genetic Counseling, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Mindfulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review