Scoping review maps digital empathy in nursing literature, highlighting its significance and research gaps.
Background/Objectives: The digitalization of healthcare has transformed nursing care and stimulated growing interest in digital empathy. However, the literature remains conceptually diverse and fragmented. This scoping review aimed to map the nursing literature on digital empathy, examining its definitions, its role in nurse–individual interactions, the factors that support or hinder it, and the research gaps in this field. Methods: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and reported following the PRISMA-ScR guideline. Electronic searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published between 2000 and 2026. Eligible studies addressed digital empathy in nursing. Data were extracted and synthesized using descriptive and thematic analysis. Results: Thirty-three studies published between 2009 and 2026 met the inclusion criteria. Thematic synthesis identified four overarching themes: (1) definition and conceptualization of digital empathy, (2) its role in nurse–individual interaction and nursing care experience, (3) factors supporting and hindering digital empathy in technology-mediated nursing care, and (4) research gaps and future needs. The findings indicate that digital empathy is increasingly recognized as an important component of technology-mediated nursing care, although conceptual definitions remain heterogeneous and theoretical development limited. Conclusions: Digital empathy is an emerging and evolving concept that may enhance compassionate, person-centred, and relational nursing care in digital healthcare environments. These findings may inform future conceptual, educational, clinical, and research developments related to digital empathy in nursing. Registration: This scoping review was prospectively registered with the Open Science Framework on 9 April 2026 (Registration DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/B2JN8).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yıldırım et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: