医学同义词与缩略词:学习什么医学术语最有益?目标问题。

IF 3.6 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Postgraduate Medical Journal Pub Date : 2024-09-22 DOI:10.1093/postmj/qgae059
Emanuele Armocida, Graziella Masciangelo, Gianfranco Natale
{"title":"医学同义词与缩略词:学习什么医学术语最有益?目标问题。","authors":"Emanuele Armocida, Graziella Masciangelo, Gianfranco Natale","doi":"10.1093/postmj/qgae059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Appropriate use of medical terminology is one of the core conditions for successful communication in monolingual and multilingual healthcare communities. The modern scientific language is based on the descriptive terminology. However, it is often the case that the advantages of descriptive terminology are at odds with the ability to express complex concepts in just a few words. To solve this practicality problem it is customary to coin abbreviations and acronyms preferred to traditional eponyms. Today eponyms are considered ambiguous and non-descriptive, linked to the terminology of the past. The overview of this study demonstrates that the current habit of using acronyms can increase the scientific descriptive capacity compared to eponyms. On the other hand, acronyms remain ambiguous and more ephemeral than eponyms. Furthermore, eponyms are not as descriptive as acronyms, but they still carry important information for a medical student. If you truly believe in the importance of Medical Humanities in the medical curriculum, two aspects cannot be overlooked. First, eponyms bring students closer in an almost subliminal way to the history of medicine and the non-strictly technical-scientific field of medicine. Second, medicine is a complex science applied to humans and must strive to keep the patient at the center of its interests. Patients and their families preferably ask us to use eponyms. Which terminology to choose for medical students? The teachers have the last word.</p>","PeriodicalId":20374,"journal":{"name":"Postgraduate Medical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medical eponyms versus acronyms: what medical terminology is most beneficial to learn? A question of goals.\",\"authors\":\"Emanuele Armocida, Graziella Masciangelo, Gianfranco Natale\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/postmj/qgae059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Appropriate use of medical terminology is one of the core conditions for successful communication in monolingual and multilingual healthcare communities. The modern scientific language is based on the descriptive terminology. However, it is often the case that the advantages of descriptive terminology are at odds with the ability to express complex concepts in just a few words. To solve this practicality problem it is customary to coin abbreviations and acronyms preferred to traditional eponyms. Today eponyms are considered ambiguous and non-descriptive, linked to the terminology of the past. The overview of this study demonstrates that the current habit of using acronyms can increase the scientific descriptive capacity compared to eponyms. On the other hand, acronyms remain ambiguous and more ephemeral than eponyms. Furthermore, eponyms are not as descriptive as acronyms, but they still carry important information for a medical student. If you truly believe in the importance of Medical Humanities in the medical curriculum, two aspects cannot be overlooked. First, eponyms bring students closer in an almost subliminal way to the history of medicine and the non-strictly technical-scientific field of medicine. Second, medicine is a complex science applied to humans and must strive to keep the patient at the center of its interests. Patients and their families preferably ask us to use eponyms. Which terminology to choose for medical students? The teachers have the last word.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20374,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Postgraduate Medical Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Postgraduate Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgae059\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postgraduate Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgae059","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

恰当使用医学术语是在单语和多语种医疗界成功交流的核心条件之一。现代科学语言以描述性术语为基础。然而,描述性术语的优势往往与用几个词表达复杂概念的能力相冲突。为了解决这个实用性问题,人们习惯于创造缩略语和首字母缩略词,而不是传统的外来语地名。如今,外来语地名被认为是模棱两可和非描述性的,与过去的术语有关。本研究的概述表明,与外来语地名相比,目前使用缩略语的习惯可以提高科学描述能力。另一方面,缩略语仍然含糊不清,比外来语地名更短暂。此外,外来语地名的描述能力不如首字母缩略词,但对于医学生来说,它们仍然承载着重要的信息。如果你真的相信医学人文在医学课程中的重要性,那么有两个方面不容忽视。首先,缩略语几乎在潜移默化中拉近了学生与医学历史和非严格技术科学领域的距离。其次,医学是一门应用于人类的复杂科学,必须努力将病人置于其利益的中心。病人及其家属最好要求我们使用同义词。为医学生选择何种术语?老师说了算。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Medical eponyms versus acronyms: what medical terminology is most beneficial to learn? A question of goals.

Appropriate use of medical terminology is one of the core conditions for successful communication in monolingual and multilingual healthcare communities. The modern scientific language is based on the descriptive terminology. However, it is often the case that the advantages of descriptive terminology are at odds with the ability to express complex concepts in just a few words. To solve this practicality problem it is customary to coin abbreviations and acronyms preferred to traditional eponyms. Today eponyms are considered ambiguous and non-descriptive, linked to the terminology of the past. The overview of this study demonstrates that the current habit of using acronyms can increase the scientific descriptive capacity compared to eponyms. On the other hand, acronyms remain ambiguous and more ephemeral than eponyms. Furthermore, eponyms are not as descriptive as acronyms, but they still carry important information for a medical student. If you truly believe in the importance of Medical Humanities in the medical curriculum, two aspects cannot be overlooked. First, eponyms bring students closer in an almost subliminal way to the history of medicine and the non-strictly technical-scientific field of medicine. Second, medicine is a complex science applied to humans and must strive to keep the patient at the center of its interests. Patients and their families preferably ask us to use eponyms. Which terminology to choose for medical students? The teachers have the last word.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Postgraduate Medical Journal
Postgraduate Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
2.00%
发文量
131
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: Postgraduate Medical Journal is a peer reviewed journal published on behalf of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine. The journal aims to support junior doctors and their teachers and contribute to the continuing professional development of all doctors by publishing papers on a wide range of topics relevant to the practicing clinician and teacher. Papers published in PMJ include those that focus on core competencies; that describe current practice and new developments in all branches of medicine; that describe relevance and impact of translational research on clinical practice; that provide background relevant to examinations; and papers on medical education and medical education research. PMJ supports CPD by providing the opportunity for doctors to publish many types of articles including original clinical research; reviews; quality improvement reports; editorials, and correspondence on clinical matters.
期刊最新文献
A Mendelian analysis of the causality between inflammatory cytokines and digestive tract cancers. Cholecystectomy and cancer risk: evidence from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and Mendelian randomization. The key to addressing the issue of academic misconduct in the medical field is to reform the evaluation system. Timeliness of reperfusion in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and outcomes in Kerala, India: results of the TRUST outcomes registry. Variation of brain natriuretic peptide assists with volume management and predicts prognosis of hemodialysis patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1