PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12442616

Communication in science.

H Deda·H Yakupoglu
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Science must have a common language. For centuries, Latin language carried out this job, but the progress in computer technology and internet world through the last 20 years, began to produce a new language with the new century; the computer language. The information masses, which need data language standardization, are the followings; Digital libraries and medical education systems, Consumer health informatics, Medical education systems, World Wide Web Applications, Database systems, Medical language processing, Automatic indexing systems, Image processing units, Telemedicine, New Generation Internet (NGI).

Explore related subjects

CommunicationHumansInformation ServicesInternetMedical Informatics ApplicationsMedical Informatics ComputingNatural Language ProcessingProgramming LanguagesScienceTerminology as TopicJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H Deda, H Yakupoglu. 2002. Communication in science.. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-6743-4_4

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Information-sharing among couples considering multifetal pregnancy reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the information-sharing strategies of couples considering fetal reduction, and the impact of these strategies on the chances of encountering hostility in their social networks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design of semistructured qualitative interviews, coded with respect to sharing strategies and level of personally directed hostility encountered. SETTING: Multiple Pregnancy Management Program, Comprehensive Genetics, New York, New York. PATIENT(S) AND INTERVENTION(S): Fifty women and their partners who were making a first visit to our maternal-fetal management facility, in order to consider the possibility of multifetal reduction as a pregnancy-management strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Development of information-sharing strategies, and the chances of encountering personally directed hostility regarding multifetal reduction associated with more and less selective strategies. RESULT(S): Four information-sharing strategies emerged from the analysis. Two of these strategies were relatively open (extended network, and both parents). Two other strategies were relatively selective (qualified family and friends, and defended relationship). The selective strategies were significantly less likely to encounter to encounter personally directed hostility (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% confidence intervals, 0.87-17.30). CONCLUSION(S): Selective sharing of information for couples considering multifetal prgnancy reduction is a potentially useful strategy for moderating potentially stressful relationships in their social networks. Clinics should find a way of integrating the discussion of selective sharing into their clinic's cultural repertoire of patient-support services.

Communication↗