Cited by 119Empathy and Medical EducationInnovations in Medical EducationHealthcare Education and Workforce Issues

Narrative medicine as a teaching strategy for nursing students to developing professionalism, empathy and humanistic caring ability: a randomized controlled trial

Open access
Xue, Mengxin, Sun, Huiping, Xue, Jin, Zhou, Jingxin, Qu, Junchao, Ji, Siqi, Bu, Yuan, Liu, Yongbing·2023·BMC Medical Education

Abstract

Background: Narrative medicine has become a solution to cultivate medical students’ ability of empathy and humanistic care. However, the role of narrative medicine is lacking in the study of professionalism. The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of narrative medical theory learning and narrative writing on professionalism, empathy and humanistic care ability of nursing students. Methods: This cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted between June 2021 and June 2022 in two universities in Jiangsu, China. The participants of this study were 85 nursing students who were randomly divided into the intervention group ( n = 43) or the control group ( n = 42). Participants in the intervention group were trained in narrative medical theory learning and narrative writing based on a Web-based platform, while those in the control group were not. Self-report questionnaires of professionalism, empathy and humanistic care ability were used before and after intervention. Results: The results showed that the professionalism score of the intervention group was (68.7 ± 6.8 vs. 64.5 ± 7.5; P = 0.005), empathy (99.4 ± 15.7 vs. 92.2 ± 14.6; P = 0.014) and humanistic care ability (127.6 ± 20.0 vs. 113.3 ± 18.8; P = 0.004) were better than the control group. Conclusion: The results of this quantitative study suggest that narrative medical theory education and narrative writing based on the network platform can promote the development of professionalism, empathy and humanistic care ability of nursing undergraduates.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12909-023-04026-5

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The long-term stability of teaching outcomes and the efficiency of translating knowledge comprehension into clinical decision-making capabilities remain critical challenges to be addressed in nursing ethics education.

    “These studies indicate that the long-term stability of teaching outcomes and the efficiency of translating knowledge comprehension into clinical decision-making capabilities remain critical challenges to be addressed [11–21].”

    From Exploring the integration of AI and national quality courses in China: a study on teaching practices in nursing smart education (2025) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Discussion’s Study limitations section says the study did not assess long-term outcomes and calls for future evaluation, supporting the concern about whether teaching outcomes persist. It does not assess the efficiency of translating knowledge comprehension into clinical decision-making; the Conclusion discusses reflection on clinical behavior, not decision-making capability. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xue, M., Sun, H., Xue, J., Zhou, J., Qu, J., Ji, S., Bu, Y., & Liu, Y.
Affiliations
Yangzhou University (CN)
Corresponding author
Liu, Yongbing
Venue
BMC Medical Education
Published
2023-01-18
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
38-38
ISSN
1472-6920 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4317361252
Cited by
119
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 9
FWCI
24.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Medical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • the Jiangsu Graduate Research and Innovation Program (KYCX21_3298)
  • the 2020 Medical Education Research Project of the Medical Education Branch of the Chinese Medical Association and Medical Education Professional Committee of the Chinese Society of Higher Education (20A0576)
  • the Interdisciplinary Research Project of Chinese Language and Literature Special Zone of Yangzhou University (yzuxk202019)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Healthcare Education and Workforce Issues
Keywords
narrative medicine, nursing students, professionalism, empathy, humanistic caring, narrative writing, online learning platforms, nursing education, undergraduate nursing education
MeSH terms
Professionalism, Narrative Medicine, Empathy, Humans, Students, Nursing, Narration

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