Suppr超能文献

消费者(谷歌)、主要利益相关者(调查)和研究人员(Cochrane 系统评价)使用的康复定义的比较和综合:术语分析。

A comparison and synthesis of rehabilitation definitions used by consumers (Google), major Stakeholders (survey) and researchers (Cochrane Systematic Reviews): a terminological analysis.

机构信息

IRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Milan, Italy.

IRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Milan, Italy -

出版信息

Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2020 Oct;56(5):682-689. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06583-1. Epub 2020 Oct 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The term "rehabilitation" is heterogeneously used in the health context. Different interpretations can lead to disagreements, misunderstandings and different interpretations of what rehabilitation is between who provides it, who receives it and who studies it. The aim of this study was to conduct a terminological analysis of the different rehabilitation definitions used by different audiences: consumers, rehabilitation stakeholders and researchers.

METHODS

We performed a terminological analysis with comparison of three different collections of rehabilitation definitions in English language. We performed: systematic reviews of databases representing consumers and lay persons (Google) and researchers (Cochrane Systematic Reviews [CSRs]), and a survey of rehabilitation stakeholders (Cochrane Rehabilitation Advisory Board). To aggregate words that had the same underlying concepts, their roots were extracted, and their occurrences counted. The 30 most frequent roots of each search were included. The 3 obtained collections were compared and similarities calculated. An overall collection of the most important 30 roots was obtained weighting those obtained in each single collection. All analyses have been performed using Excel.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-seven rehabilitation definitions were identified: 23 from CSRs, 36 from the survey and 128 from Google. The most frequent roots were "function*" (92%), followed by "proces*" (69‰), "health*" (59‰), "disab*" (53‰), and "person*" (50‰). The most common relevant roots related to rehabilitation concept were "proces*" (73‰) in Google, "function*" (109‰) in the survey and "disab*" (41‰) in CSRs. The noun "function" prevailed in Google and "functioning" in the survey.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our findings, any definition of rehabilitation for research purposes should include the identified terms, focusing on the concept of process and considering the main elements of functioning (and function), disability, person, health, optimization and environment.

摘要

背景

“康复”一词在卫生领域的使用存在差异。不同的解释可能导致提供康复服务、接受康复服务和研究康复的各方之间产生分歧、误解和对康复的不同理解。本研究的目的是对不同受众(消费者、康复利益相关者和研究人员)使用的康复定义进行术语分析。

方法

我们对三种不同的英语康复定义集进行了术语分析,并进行了比较。我们进行了以下操作:对代表消费者和非专业人士(Google)以及研究人员(Cochrane 系统评价 [CSR])的数据库进行系统评价,以及对康复利益相关者(Cochrane 康复咨询委员会)进行调查。为了聚合具有相同潜在概念的单词,提取了它们的词根,并计算了它们的出现次数。每个搜索的前 30 个最常见的词根都包括在内。将 3 个获得的集合进行比较并计算相似性。通过对每个单个集合中获得的词根进行加权,获得了最重要的 30 个词根的总体集合。所有分析均使用 Excel 进行。

结果

共确定了 187 个康复定义:CSR 中 23 个,调查中 36 个,Google 中 128 个。最常见的词根是“function*”(92%),其次是“proces*”(69‰)、“health*”(59‰)、“disab*”(53‰)和“person*”(50‰)。与康复概念最相关的常见词根是 Google 中的“proces*”(73‰)、调查中的“function*”(109‰)和 CSRs 中的“disab*”(41‰)。名词“function”在 Google 中占主导地位,而“functioning”在调查中占主导地位。

结论

根据我们的发现,任何用于研究目的的康复定义都应包括已确定的术语,重点关注过程概念,并考虑功能(和功能)、残疾、人、健康、优化和环境的主要要素。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验