- 締切済み
和訳のチェックをしていただけますか？
原文 過去の投与経験から麻酔医(Group A)では投与量が相対的に多く、Group Bでは保守的であった旨を考察する。 私の英訳 Take into consideration the fact that due to the difference in the anesthesiologists' past clinical experiences, subjects in Group A received relatively larger dose while subjects in Group B received conservative dose.
- Sakura_30
- お礼率17% (42/243)
- 英語
- 回答数1
- ありがとう数0
- みんなの回答 （1）
- 専門家の回答
みんなの回答
試訳です。 1案： We examine here the fact the amount of anesthetic dose administered by Group A anesthesiologists was relatively larger than the conservative dose by Group B owing to the past clinical experiences of Group A. 2案： We examine here the fact that Group A anesthesiologits' with past clinical experience administered relatively larger amount of dose than Group B's conservative amount. 3案： We examine here the fact that Group A anesthesiologists' administered relatively larger amount of dose owing to their past clinical experiences while Group B administered conservatively. Take into consideration = 考慮する examine = 検証する どちらも考察するという意味はありますが、ここではexamineがよりしっくりきます。 1-3案は麻酔医を主語とするか、麻酔量を主語とするかの違いです。なお、3案は「私の英訳」をできるだけ生かしたものです。 「私の訳」では麻酔される方が主語になっていますが、これはわかりにくくなるので、subjectは排除しました。 個人的には1案がいいような気がしていますが・・・ 余談ですが、質問題名の「和訳のチェックをしていだけますか？」とありますが、日本語から英語にするのは「英訳」だと思っていました・・・
関連するQ&A
- 和訳についての質問に答えていただけますか？
以下の文章についてですが、(二回目投与後31%、初投与後25%)、の部分は1.0ｍｇ群についてのデ－タに係っています。今のままだと1.0ｍｇ投与群以外に係っているようにも見えます。どうすれば改善できるでしょうか。よろしくお願い致します。 The incidence of adverse events decreased slightly after the second study dose administration in all active treatment groups except for the 1.0 mg group (31% after the second dose versus 25% after the first dose). 有害事象の発生率は治験薬の二回目投与後に1.0 mg群以外の投与群でわずかに減少した (二回目投与後31%、初投与後25%)。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 医療系論文の和訳の添削
医学的な言い回しも自信がありません。添削お願いします。 Dosage and administration Before use (≤2 hours before administration), one vial of the investigational drug should be dissolved in exactly 5 mL of physiological saline, and one dose should be accurately taken from the solution according to the weight-dose conversion table, based on the subject’s body weight at enrollment (rounded to the nearest kilogram). The dose should be diluted in 100 mL of physiological saline, and administered by continuous intravenous infusion over 2 hours with an infusion pump. 用量・投与 使用前（投与する２時間前）に１バイアルの治験薬を5mlの生理食塩液に溶解する。 １ドースは被験者の登録時の体重（端数は四捨五入）を基にthe weight-dose 投与量換算表（？）により算出された量を計る。ドースは１００mlの生理食塩液で希釈し、注入ポンプを用いて２時間以上かけて持続静脈注入する。 Patient enrollment (1) The Principal Investigator or Clinical Investigator shall obtain informed consent from potential subjects and perform the examinations necessary to assess eligibility. (2) The Clinical Investigator shall make the necessary entries in the Case Registration Form and send it to the Data Center by fax. 患者の登録 （１）治験責任医師または治験担当医師は潜在被験者からインフォームドコンセントを受け取り、適正判断に必要な検査を実施する。 （２）治験担当医師は、ケースレジストレーションフォームに必要事項を記載し、データセンターへFAXにて送付する。 よろしくお願いします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 次の英文を和訳してほしいです。
There was one large difference between the animal study and the human research projects mentioned in the article: the researchers controlled what the animals in the earlier studies ate, while the humans reported their eating behavior. Thus, as Dr. Bartke mentions, there is a question about the quality of the data. As long as the researchers kept careful records on what was fed to the animal subjects and prevented the animals from getting food from other sources, they could be confident of the food intake measurement. Humans, however, are not lab rats. It is not ethical, or generally possible, to completely control the environment that a human experiences. In this case, it was likely not economically feasible to control the diet for the subjects in the “diet group.” As a result, the researchers relied on self-reported data from these subjects. It is very unlikely that all of the members who reported that they cut their caloric intake by 30% actually did so. If the control their diet and observe their action, then we might be able to accept that the members of the group actually reduced their calories by 30%. However, one would then worry that a group of people who could take three months to go to a lab environment might not be representative of the general population.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 次の英文を和訳してほしいです。
The article mentions that the 50 research subjects were divided into three groups. Thus, each group likely had 16 or 17 members. With such a small sample size, the findings can only be described as preliminary. Even so, the results are very interesting because earlier studies with animals suggested that reduced-calorie diets may improve memory. This study, with its admittedly small sample, backs up the original research and makes it clear that the research should be continued. To be sure, a study done with a larger sample would seem to be the next step. Surprisingly, samples do not have to be very large in order to make accurate predictions about a population. In fact, using a sample is actually more accurate than if data on every member of a large group were collected. For one thing, with a large population, the time required to get data on each member would mean that conditions might change between the beginning of the data collection and the final analysis of the data. Another problem would be that more mistakes in entering the data would occur if too many members were surveyed. Thus, if a proper sample size is selected, and data are collected properly, an accurate prediction about a population can be made even with a relatively small sample.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 英訳教えてください。お願いいたします。
英語翻訳教えてください！ 「実験は、AとBを投与し、さらにCを投与した群（treated group）と 投与しなかった群（control）で行われた。」 この文を英語に翻訳していただけないでしょうか？ その時「with or without」を使って翻訳して頂きたいのです。 ちなみにですが、treated groupはAとBとCを投与され、 controlはAとBだけ投与されています。 この2群で実験を行ったということを英語で言いたいのです。 自分でやってみた訳文は以下の通りです。 This experiment was performed in combination treatment with A and B with C (treated group) or without C (control). なんか、うまく英文にできません。。。 この訳文を添削して下さるかあるいは新しく翻訳したものを教えてください！ 何卒よろしくお願いいたします
- 締切済み
- 英語
- この文章の和訳をお願いします。
In Figs. 7b and 7c (b=2.8 and 3.1) we find that the τ values of close-encounter orbits are confined in a region near τ=0 and, further, its width decreases with an increase in b. In particular, when b=3.1 (i.e., b very close to b_max), the τ values of the close-encounter orbits localize in a narrow region around τ=0. This comes from the choice of φ=0 in the initial conditions: When b is relatively large and the mutual gravity is weak, then a particle continues approximately its original Keplerian motion. When the guiding center of the particle comes across the x-axis (i.e., when t=0), its position is given by (see Eq. (7) with φ=0) x=b-cosτ, y=-2esinτ, (23) z=-isinω. The distance from the origin becomes minimum when τ<<π. Thus only particles with τ<<π can be disturbed drastically by the gravity of the protoplanet and have the possibility of encountering the two-body sphere. The fact that the width of τ in the finely dotted region (i.e., the τ of close-encounter orbits) decreases with an increase in b is also observed in other e and i, as long as b>e. This behavior is very useful to systematically find collision orbits. If we can once find an appropriate restricted region of close-encounter orbit, e.g., τ_1≦τ≦τ_2, for some b_1 (b_1>e), then for b>b_1 it is sufficient to search close-encounter orbits in the limited region between τ_1 and τ_2. よろしくお願いします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- t検定に関する質問です
統計学の質問 USMLE（アメリカの医師国家試験）用の問題集で次のようなものがあります 適切な検定手法を選ぶ問題なのですが、問題文が Used to evaluate differences between a group of medical students' scores on USMLE Step 1 and the same students' scores on USMLE Step 2. となっており、 選択肢の中には Paired t-test, Correlationなどが含まれています。 [注：アメリカの医師国家試験は、Step 1, 2, 3と３つの異なる試験から成っています。問題数や制限時間などのインターフェースは似ていますが、各stepの内容や難易度は異なっています。] 私は、USMLE Step 1 と USMLE Step 2は異なる試験で、スケールが異なるのでCorrelationが正解だと思ったのですが、 問題集の正解はPaired t-testとなっており、その根拠は a paired t-test is used, because the scores evaluated are from the same medical students on two different examinations, USMLE Step 1 and USMLE Step 2. と書かれております。 私のこれまでの理解では、 T testは同一スケールにある２つの集合の平均の比較に用い、この２つの集合が、 「異なる被験者」から得られたデータからなる場合はnonpaired t-test 「同じ被験者で異なる時間」から得られたデータからなる場合はpaired t-test を用いるというものでした。 実際、他の参考書では次のように記載されています。 Nonpaired t-test: Tests the mean difference in body weights of subjects in group A and subjects in group B at Time 1 (i.e., two groups of subjects are sampled on one occasion). Paired t-test: Tests the mean difference in body weights of people in group A at Time 1 and Time 2 (i.e., the same people are sampled on two occasions). さて、どちらの言い分が正しいでしょう。 よろしくお願いします。
- ベストアンサー
- 数学・算数
- この英文の和訳をお願いします。
The second feature seen from Fig.11 is that the profile of R(e,0) does not depend significantly on r_p (for r_p=0.005 to 0.0002). Only an exception is found near e≒1, but this is, in some sense, a singular point in R(e,0), which appears in a narrow region around e≒1 ( in fact, for e=0.9 and 1.2, there is no appreciable difference between r_p=0.005 and 0.0002). Thus, neglecting such fine structures in R(e,0), we can conclude that R(e,0) does depend very weakly on r_p. In other words, the dependence on r_p of <P(e,0)> is well approximated by that of <P(e,0)>_2B given by Eq. (28). Now, we will phenomenalogically show what physical quantity is related to the peak at e≒1. We introduce the collisional flux F(e,E) for orbits with e and E, where E is the Jacobi energy given by (see Eq. (15)) E=e^2/2-(3b^2)/8+9/2. (31) The collisional flux F(e,E) is defined by F(e,E)=(2/π)∫【‐π→π】p_col(e,i=0, b(E), τ)dτ. (32) From Eqs. (11) and (31), we obtain <P(e,0)>=∫F(e,E)dE. (33) In Fig.12, F(e,E) is plotted as a function of E for the cases of e=0, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0. We can see from this figure that in the case of e=1 a large fraction of low energy planetesimals contributes to the collisional rate compared to other cases (even to the cases with e<1). In general, in the case of high energy a solution for the three-body problem can be well described by the two-body approximation: in other words, in the case of low energy a large difference would exist between a solution for the three-body problem and that in the two-body approximation. As shown before, this difference appears as an enhancement of the collisional rate. Thereby an enhancement factor peak is formed at e≒1 where a large fraction of low-energy planetesimals contributes to the collisional rate. よろしくお願いいたします。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 【和訳】和訳をお願いします。
国連の世界貿易レポートを読んでいるのですが、イマイチ理解できません。 大変長い文章ですが、和訳していただけませんでしょうか。 どうかよろしくお願いします。 As noted above, GVC participation – or the role that individual countries play in international production networks – is driven by many different factors, from size of the economy to industrial structure and level of industrialization, composition of exports and positioning in value chains, policy elements, and others. As a result, countries with very different characteristics may be very similar in the ranking of GVC participation (figure IV.9). The GVC participation of many countries relates substantially to GVC interactions within their respective regions. Instead of a global reach, most value chains have a distinctive regional character, as shown in figure IV.10. North and Central American value chain links are especially strong, as are intra- European Union ones. The largest extraregional bilateral GVC flows are between Germany and the United States, China and Germany, and Japan and the United States, in that order. The share of global value added trade captured by developing economies is increasing rapidly. It grew from about 20 per cent in 1990, to 30 per cent in 2000, to over 40 per cent in 2010. As a group, developing and transition economies are capturing an increasing share of the global value added trade pie (figure IV.11). As global trade grows, developed economies appear to rely increasingly on imported content for their exports, allowing developing countries to add disproportionately to their domestic value added in exports. Some of the larger emerging markets, such as India, Brazil, Argentina and Turkey, have relatively low GVC participation rates. These countries may have lower upstream participation levels, both because of the nature of their exports (natural resources and services exports tend to have less need for imported content or foreign value added) and because larger economies display a greater degree of self-sufficiency in production for exports. They may also have lower downstream participation levels because of a focus on exports of so-called final-demand goods and services, i.e. those not used as intermediates in exports to third countries. Investment and trade are inextricably intertwined. Much of trade in natural resources is driven by large cross-border investments in extractive industries by globally operating TNCs. Market-seeking foreign direct investment (FDI) by TNCs also generates trade, often shifting arm’slength trade to intra-firm trade. Efficiency-seeking FDI, through which firms seek to locate discrete parts of their production processes in low-cost locations, is particularly associated with GVCs; it increases the amount of trade taking place within the international production networks of TNCs and contributes to the “double counting” in global trade flows discussed in this report.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
