Broken asked in 社會與文化語言 · 5 years ago

看不懂英文文獻的內容

Does a reduction in mean birth weight and a lower incidence of shoulder dystocia justify the mass expansion of the numbers of women diagnosed with mild GDM? A number of other claims of benefit are commonly made, and it is important to consider these too. The potential benefits of detecting and treating mild GDM can usefully be considered from the perspective of the mother and the offspring, both in the short term and in the long term.

In the short term, the most important maternal benefit might be that, by reducing fetal size, the caesarean section rate can be lowered. In the MFMU trial, in which practitioners were not aware who was not being treated, there was a lower caesarean section rate in the intervention group than in the usual care group (27%vs. 34%), and this may reflect the smaller size of neonates in the treatment group. However, there is also compelling evidence that knowing that women have GDM makes obstetricians more likely to intervene. Therefore, it does not seem likely that diagnosing more women with GDM will, in reality, change the caesarean section rate significantly, particularly in an environment where rates are increasing all around the world – a change that is not being driven by concerns about GDM

In the long term, women with GDM are of course at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, and the diagnostic criteria for GDM were originally formulated for their ability to predict this in the mothers, rather than adverse pregnancy outcomes. One argument for screening has been that knowing they were at risk of type 2 diabetes in the future would encourage women to make lifestyle changes to reduce this risk. There is no data to suggest this actually happens and, as Jarrett pointed out many years ago, if this was to be the justification then we should also offer screening to all the fathers so that we could estimate their future risk.

因為要寫此篇文章的心得,但是這兩個段落不太明白意思,想請問能不能幫忙翻譯,讓我看完可以寫出心得,希望不要直接從google翻譯貼給我!感恩。

最近常常吃閉門羹還麻煩各位相助了qq

2 Answers

Rating
  • 5 years ago
    Best Answer

    醫學論文英翻中

    是否平均出生體重的降低與較低的難產率,可判定在女性經診斷具有輕度妊娠期糖尿病的族羣中,出現有擴大的現象?有其他許多一般性的有利論點,重要的是應考慮到這些狀況。偵測和治療妊娠期糖尿病可能對母親和後代的角度考慮上有長期和短期上的好處。

    In the short term, the most important maternal benefit might be that, by reducing fetal size, the caesarean section rate can be lowered. In the MFMU trial, in which practitioners were not aware who was not being treated, there was a lower caesarean section rate in the intervention group than in the usual care group (27%vs. 34%), and this may reflect the smaller size of neonates in the treatment group. However, there is also compelling evidence that knowing that women have GDM makes obstetricians more likely to intervene. Therefore, it does not seem likely that diagnosing more women with GDM will, in reality, change the caesarean section rate significantly, particularly in an environment where rates are increasing all around the world ??a change that is not being driven by concerns about GDM

    在短期內,對產婦最重要的好處可能就是藉由減少胎兒的大小,可減低剖腹產率。在MFMU試驗中,開業醫不知道有誰接受過治療,相較於一般的照護群組。干預組的剖腹產率降低(27%比34%),這可能反映出治療組中的新生兒尺寸更小的狀況。不過,也有令人信服的證據顯示妊娠糖尿病婦女讓產科醫生更可能進行干預性的治療。因此,尤其是在全球的剖腹產率上昇趨勢下,似乎不可能在實務上診斷出患有妊娠糖尿病的婦女會明顯改變剖腹產率,這樣的改變不是起因於對妊娠糖尿病的關注。

    In the long term, women with GDM are of course at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, and the diagnostic criteria for GDM were originally formulated for their ability to predict this in the mothers, rather than adverse pregnancy outcomes. One argument for screening has been that knowing they were at risk of type 2 diabetes in the future would encourage women to make lifestyle changes to reduce this risk. There is no data to suggest this actually happens and, as Jarrett pointed out many years ago, if this was to be the justification then we should also offer screening to all the fathers so that we could estimate their future risk.

    從長遠來看,妊娠糖尿病婦女患有2型糖尿病的風險當然也增加了,關於妊娠糖尿病的診斷標準最初是受到預測母親患病的診斷能力所左右,而非取決於懷孕上的的不良症狀。一個關於篩檢上的爭論就是未來患有2型糖尿病的危險性,必然促使婦女改變其生活方式來降低此風險。沒有數據顯示實際上發生此情況,正如多年前賈勒特所指出,如果這是用於判定的理由,那麼我們也應供篩檢所有的父親,好讓我們評估未來的風險。

  • 5 years ago

    我糖尿病十五年越來越嚴重,吃下面報導的藥不到半年全恢復標準併發症全改善,有需要可以去看看,醫學院產學研發的,效果的確很好,比起我吃過衛福部核准的降血糖健康食品效果好上幾千倍.

    https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E9%AF%BD%E9%AD%9A%E6%B0...

    http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/2013100200032...

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.