University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis.
Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Nov 1;5(11):e2242972. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.42972.
Despite acknowledging that medical jargon should be avoided, health care practitioners frequently use it when communicating with patients.
To characterize the understanding of common medical jargon terms by surveying a cross section of the general public and studying phrases that have established meanings in regular usage but different meanings in a medical context (eg, negative and positive test results).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cross-sectional study, participants indicated their understanding of phrases that may have different meanings in medicine than in colloquial English via a mix of short answer and multiple choice questions. Several questions included paired phrases to assess for differences in understanding with or without jargon. Volunteers were recruited at the 2021 Minnesota State Fair near St Paul, Minnesota. An electronic survey was given to a volunteer sample of 215 adults (>18 years) who did not work or train to work in the medical field and spoke and read English.
Completing a written or verbal survey.
The main outcome was an accurate understanding of the medical terminology. Free-text responses were coded by 2 researchers for comprehension. Secondary outcomes looked for associations between volunteer demographics and understanding.
The 215 respondents (135 [63%] female; mean [SD] age, 42 [17] years) demonstrated a varied ability to interpret medical jargon phrases. For example, most participants (207 [96%]) knew that negative cancer screening results meant they did not have cancer, but fewer participants (143 [79%]) knew that the phrase "your tumor is progressing" was bad news, or that positive lymph nodes meant the cancer had spread (170 [67%]). While most (171 [80%]) recognized that an unremarkable chest radiography was good news, only 44 participants (21%) correctly understood that a clinician saying their radiography was impressive was generally bad news. In each of the paired phrases comparing jargon vs nonjargon approaches, the nonjargon phrase was understood significantly better (P < .001).
These findings suggest that several common phrases are misunderstood when used in a medical setting, with the interpreted meaning frequently the exact opposite of what is intended.
尽管医疗保健从业者承认应避免使用医学术语，但他们在与患者交流时经常使用这些术语。
通过调查普通大众的情况，研究在日常使用中具有既定含义但在医学语境中含义不同的短语（例如，阴性和阳性测试结果），来描述大众对常见医学术语的理解。
设计、地点和参与者：在这项横断面研究中，参与者通过简答题和多项选择题来表明他们对可能在医学上与英语口语中含义不同的短语的理解。有几个问题包括配对短语，以评估是否使用或不使用行话来理解的差异。志愿者是在明尼苏达州圣保罗附近的 2021 年明尼苏达州博览会上招募的。向 215 名非医疗行业工作或培训的成年人（>18 岁）发放了电子调查问卷。
完成书面或口头调查。
主要结果是对医学术语的准确理解。由 2 名研究人员对自由文本回复进行编码，以确定理解程度。次要结果则寻找志愿者人口统计学特征与理解之间的关联。
215 名受访者（135 名[63%]女性；平均[SD]年龄，42[17]岁）对解释医学术语短语的能力参差不齐。例如，大多数参与者（207 名[96%]）知道阴性癌症筛查结果意味着他们没有癌症，但较少的参与者（143 名[79%]）知道“你的肿瘤在进展”是坏消息，或者阳性淋巴结意味着癌症已经扩散（170 名[67%]）。虽然大多数参与者（171 名[80%]）认为胸部射线照相术无异常是个好消息，但只有 44 名参与者（21%）正确理解了临床医生说他们的射线照相术令人印象深刻通常是坏消息。在比较使用行话和非行话方法的每对短语中，非行话短语的理解明显更好（P < .001）。
这些发现表明，在医学环境中使用时，一些常见短语被误解，其解释含义通常与意图完全相反。
