• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

当英语不是医生的第一语言时,他们对英文的科学文章的理解程度如何?一项随机对照试验。

How well do doctors understand a scientific article in English when it is not their first language? A randomised controlled trial.

机构信息

The Journal of The Norwegian Medical Association, Oslo, Norway

The Journal of The Norwegian Medical Association, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 10;11(6):e043444. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043444.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043444
PMID:34112640
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8194323/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

English is the of science. How well doctors understand English is therefore crucial for their understanding of scientific articles. However, only 5% of the world's population have English as their first language.

METHODS

Objectives: To compare doctors' comprehension of a scientific article when read in their first language (Norwegian) versus their second language (English). Our hypothesis was that doctors reading the article in Norwegian would comprehend the content better than those reading it in English.

DESIGN

Parallel group randomised controlled trial. We randomised doctors to read the same clinical review article in either Norwegian or English, before completing a questionnaire about the content of the article.

SETTING

Conference in primary care medicine in Norway, 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

130 native Norwegian-speaking doctors, 71 women and 59 men. One participant withdrew before responding to the questionnaire and was excluded from the analyses.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly assigned to read a review article in either Norwegian (n=64) or English (n=66). Reading time was limited to 7 min followed by 7 min to answer a questionnaire.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Total score on questions related to the article content (potential range -9 to 20).

RESULTS

Doctors who read the article in Norwegian had a mean total score of 10.40 (SD 3.96) compared with 9.08 (SD 3.47) among doctors who read the article in English, giving a mean difference of 1.32 (95% CI 0.03 to 2.62; p=0.046). Age was independently associated with total score, with decreased comprehension with increasing age.

CONCLUSION

The difference in comprehension between the group who read in Norwegian and the group who read in English was statistically significant but modest, suggesting that the language gap in academia is possible to overcome.

摘要

简介

英语是科学的通用语言。因此,医生对英语的理解程度对他们理解科学文章至关重要。然而,世界上只有 5%的人口将英语作为第一语言。

方法

目的:比较医生用母语(挪威语)和第二语言(英语)阅读科学文章时的理解程度。我们的假设是,用挪威语阅读文章的医生比用英语阅读的医生能更好地理解文章内容。

设计

平行组随机对照试验。我们将医生随机分为两组,分别用挪威语或英语阅读同一篇临床综述文章,然后完成一份关于文章内容的问卷。

地点

2018 年挪威初级保健医学会议。

参与者

130 名母语为挪威语的医生,其中 71 名女性,59 名男性。有 1 名参与者在回答问卷前退出,被排除在分析之外。

干预措施

参与者被随机分配用挪威语(n=64)或英语(n=66)阅读一篇综述文章。阅读时间限制为 7 分钟,然后用 7 分钟回答问卷。

主要观察结果

与文章内容相关的问题的总得分(潜在范围-9 至 20)。

结果

用挪威语阅读文章的医生平均总分为 10.40(SD 3.96),而用英语阅读的医生平均总分为 9.08(SD 3.47),平均差异为 1.32(95%CI 0.03 至 2.62;p=0.046)。年龄与总分独立相关,随着年龄的增长,理解能力下降。

结论

用挪威语阅读的组和用英语阅读的组之间的理解差异在统计学上有显著意义,但幅度较小,这表明学术界的语言差距是可以克服的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb3a/8194323/f485ba740871/bmjopen-2020-043444f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb3a/8194323/f485ba740871/bmjopen-2020-043444f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb3a/8194323/f485ba740871/bmjopen-2020-043444f01.jpg

相似文献

1
How well do doctors understand a scientific article in English when it is not their first language? A randomised controlled trial.当英语不是医生的第一语言时,他们对英文的科学文章的理解程度如何?一项随机对照试验。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 10;11(6):e043444. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043444.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
[Do Scandinavian physicians understand each other's languages?].[斯堪的纳维亚的医生能听懂彼此的语言吗?]
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2001 Jun 30;121(17):2042-4.
4
Phonics training for English-speaking poor readers.针对说英语的阅读能力差的人进行的自然拼读法训练。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12:CD009115. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009115.pub2.
5
[Paper or screen, mother tongue or English--which is better?].[纸质版还是电子版,母语还是英语——哪种更好?]
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2002 Jun 30;122(17):1646-8.
6
[Reading habits of Norwegian physicians].[挪威医生的阅读习惯]
Nord Med. 1991;106(2):53-5.
7
Rules to be adopted for publishing a scientific paper.发表科学论文应采用的规则。
Ann Ital Chir. 2016;87:1-3.
8
[Reader survey of the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association 2007].《挪威医学协会杂志》2007年读者调查
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2008 Jun 26;128(13):1512-4.
9
[The use of Internet among Norwegian physicians].挪威医生对互联网的使用
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1999 Nov 30;119(29):4342-4.
10
Doctors' learning habits: CME activities among Norwegian physicians over the last decade.医生的学习习惯:挪威医生过去十年间的继续医学教育活动
BMC Med Educ. 2007 May 8;7:10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-7-10.

引用本文的文献

1
Overcoming Barriers: The AO Foundation's Role in Latin American Scientific Growth.克服障碍:AO基金会在拉丁美洲科学发展中的作用。
Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2025 Feb 5;18(1):11. doi: 10.3390/cmtr18010011. eCollection 2025 Mar.
2
The application effect of the Rasch measurement model combined with the CRF model: An analysis based on English discourse.拉什测量模型与条件随机场模型联合应用效果分析——基于英语语篇的研究
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 22;19(8):e0309001. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309001. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
A Bilingual Advantage? An Appeal for a Change in Perspective and Recommendations for Future Research.双语优势?呼吁转变视角及对未来研究的建议。
Behav Sci (Basel). 2019 Sep 4;9(9):95. doi: 10.3390/bs9090095.
2
The true meaning of leaving no one behind.不让任何人掉队的真正意义。
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 May;7(5):e533. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30176-7.
3
Does the Bilingual Advantage in Cognitive Control Exist and If So, What Are Its Modulating Factors? A Systematic Review.认知控制中的双语优势是否存在?如果存在,其调节因素有哪些?一项系统综述。
Behav Sci (Basel). 2019 Mar 13;9(3):27. doi: 10.3390/bs9030027.
4
Should pregnant women receive lower or higher medication doses?孕妇应该接受较低还是较高的药物剂量?
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2018 Oct 30;138(17). doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.18.0065.
5
Verbal intelligence in bilinguals when measured in L1 and L2.双语者使用第一语言(L1)和第二语言(L2)进行测量时的言语智力。
Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2019 Sep-Oct;26(5):497-502. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2018.1448819. Epub 2018 Apr 4.
6
Is linguistic injustice a myth? A response to Hyland (2016).语言不公正只是个神话吗?对海兰德(2016年)的回应。
J Second Lang Writ. 2016 Dec;34:3-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.09.003. Epub 2016 Oct 7.
7
Asymmetrical switch costs in bilingual language production induced by reading words.阅读单词诱发双语语言产出中的非对称转换代价
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2014 Jan;40(1):284-92. doi: 10.1037/a0034060. Epub 2013 Aug 19.
8
Vocabulary and verbal fluency of bilingual and monolingual college students.双语和单语大学生的词汇量及语言流畅性
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2007 Mar;22(3):415-22. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2007.01.015. Epub 2007 Mar 1.
9
Paper or screen, mother tongue or English: which is better? A randomized trial.纸质版还是电子版,母语还是英语:哪种更好?一项随机试验。
JAMA. 2002 Jun 5;287(21):2851-3. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.21.2851.
10
The english language: a problem for the non-Anglo-Saxon scientific community.英语:非盎格鲁-撒克逊科学界面临的一个问题。
Br Med J. 1975 Jun 7;2(5970):553-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.5970.553.