Medical eponyms versus acronyms: what medical terminology is most beneficial to learn? A question of goals

Appropriate use of medical terminology is one of the core conditions for successful communication in monolingual and multilingual healthcare communities. The modern scientific language is based on the descriptive terminology. However, it is often the case that the advantages of descriptive terminology are at odds with the ability to express complex concepts in just a few words. To solve this practicality problem it is customary to coin abbreviations and acronyms preferred to traditional eponyms. Today eponyms are considered ambiguous and non-descriptive, linked to the terminology of the past. The overview of this study demonstrates that the current habit of using acronyms can increase the scientific descriptive capacity compared to eponyms. On the other hand, acronyms remain ambiguous and more ephemeral than eponyms. Furthermore, eponyms are not as descriptive as acronyms, but they still carry important information for a medical student. If you truly believe in the importance of Medical Humanities in the medical curriculum, two aspects cannot be overlooked. First, eponyms bring students closer in an almost subliminal way to the history of medicine and the non-strictly technical-scientific field of medicine. Second, medicine is a complex science applied to humans and must strive to keep the patient at the center of its interests. Patients and their families preferably ask us to use eponyms. Which terminology to choose for medical students? The teachers have the last word.

Definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of angioedema (DANCE): AAAAI, ACAAI, ACARE, and APAAACI DANCE consensus

BACKGROUND

Angioedema (AE) manifests with intermittent, localized, self-limiting swelling of the subcutaneous and/or submucosal tissue. AE is heterogeneous, can be hereditary or acquired, may occur only once or be recurrent, may exhibit wheals or not, and may be due to mast cell mediators, bradykinin, or other mechanisms. Several different taxonomic systems are currently used, making it difficult to compare the results of studies, develop multicenter collaboration, and harmonize AE treatment.

OBJECTIVE

We developed a consensus on the definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of AE (DANCE).

METHODS

The initiative involved 91 experts from 35 countries and was endorsed by 53 scientific and medical societies, and patient organizations. A consensus was reached by online discussion and voting using the Delphi process over a period of 16 months (June 2021 to November 2022).

RESULTS

The DANCE initiative resulted in an international consensus on the definition, classification, and terminology of AE. The new consensus classification features 5 types and endotypes of AE and a harmonized vocabulary of abbreviations/acronyms.

CONCLUSION

The DANCE classification complements current clinical guidelines and expert consensus recommendations on the diagnostic assessment and treatment of AE. DANCE does not replace current clinical guidelines, and expert consensus algorithms and should not be misconstrued in a way that affects reimbursement of medicines prescribed by physicians using sound clinical judgment. We anticipate that this new AE taxonomy and nomenclature will harmonize and facilitate AE research and clinical studies, thereby improving patient care.

Toward standard abbreviations and acronyms for use in articles on aortic disease

Objectives

Academic medical literature is fraught with complex article-specific acronyms and abbreviations that can impair communication and make reading arduous. Our goal is to ease frustration with bespoke, inconsistent, and variable sets of abbreviations that currently exist for common aorta-related terminology (eg, anatomy, imaging, disease, and therapy). We hope to ease reading and improve communication in the aortic sphere of cardiovascular literature.

Methods

We reviewed a total of 205 published references related to aortic disease, including a systematic review of aorta-related articles in the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery from the years 2020 and 2021. The array of variable definitions, abbreviations, and acronyms encountered in different papers that refer to the same terminology was striking, revealing that there were few standardized abbreviations in the aortic literature. We cataloged these terms, their associated abbreviations, and their frequency of use, and compiled a list of proposed standard abbreviations for commonly used terms that could be implemented uniformly in articles written about aortic diseases.

Results

We present suggested acronyms and abbreviations for common terminology related to the aorta. It is anticipated that this standard list will evolve over time as the literature and technology of the field grows and develops.

Conclusions

A proposed standard set of acronyms and abbreviations for aorta-related terminology is provided that, if found useful, could be implemented broadly in the aortic literature.

Acronyms and Opportunities for Improving Deep Nets

Recently, several studies have reported promising results with BERT-like methods on acronym tasks. In this study, we find an older rule-based program, Ab3P, not only performs better, but error analysis suggests why. There is a well-known spelling convention in acronyms where each letter in the short form (SF) refers to “salient” letters in the long form (LF). The error analysis uses decision trees and logistic regression to show that there is an opportunity for many pre-trained models (BERT, T5, BioBert, BART, ERNIE) to take advantage of this spelling convention.

The growth of acronyms in the scientific literature

Some acronyms are useful and are widely understood, but many of the acronyms used in scientific papers hinder understanding and contribute to the increasing fragmentation of science. Here we report the results of an analysis of more than 24 million article titles and 18 million article abstracts published between 1950 and 2019. There was at least one acronym in 19% of the titles and 73% of the abstracts. Acronym use has also increased over time, but the re-use of acronyms has declined. We found that from more than one million unique acronyms in our data, just over 2,000 (0.2%) were used regularly, and most acronyms (79%) appeared fewer than 10 times. Acronyms are not the biggest current problem in science communication, but reducing their use is a simple change that would help readers and potentially increase the value of science.

A normative study of acronyms and acronym naming

Acronyms are an idiosyncratic part of our everyday vocabulary. Research in word processing has used acronyms as a tool to answer fundamental questions such as the nature of the word superiority effect (WSE) or which is the best way to account for word-reading processes. In this study, acronym naming was assessed by looking at the influence that a number of variables known to affect mainstream word processing has had in acronym naming. The nature of the effect of these factors on acronym naming was examined using a multilevel regression analysis. First, 146 acronyms were described in terms of their age of acquisition, bigram and trigram frequencies, imageability, number of orthographic neighbors, frequency, orthographic and phonological length, print-to-pronunciation patterns, and voicing characteristics. Naming times were influenced by lexical and sublexical factors, indicating that acronym naming is a complex process affected by more variables than those previously considered.

Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment: terminology, classification, and origins

The primary aim of this article is to provide an overview of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) detected in the environment, wildlife, and humans, and recommend clear, specific, and descriptive terminology, names, and acronyms for PFASs. The overarching objective is to unify and harmonize communication on PFASs by offering terminology for use by the global scientific, regulatory, and industrial communities. A particular emphasis is placed on long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids, substances related to the long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids, and substances intended as alternatives to the use of the long-chain perfluoroalkyl acids or their precursors. First, we define PFASs, classify them into various families, and recommend a pragmatic set of common names and acronyms for both the families and their individual members. Terminology related to fluorinated polymers is an important aspect of our classification. Second, we provide a brief description of the 2 main production processes, electrochemical fluorination and telomerization, used for introducing perfluoroalkyl moieties into organic compounds, and we specify the types of byproducts (isomers and homologues) likely to arise in these processes. Third, we show how the principal families of PFASs are interrelated as industrial, environmental, or metabolic precursors or transformation products of one another. We pay particular attention to those PFASs that have the potential to be converted, by abiotic or biotic environmental processes or by human metabolism, into long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylic or sulfonic acids, which are currently the focus of regulatory action. The Supplemental Data lists 42 families and subfamilies of PFASs and 268 selected individual compounds, providing recommended names and acronyms, and structural formulas, as well as Chemical Abstracts Service registry numbers.

The ACRONYM (Alternatives for Circumvention of Restrictions on Naming BY Trialists of Their Manuscripts) Report

It is hoped that this commentary may draw attention to the issues raised by the enthusiastic naming of large clinical trials. Although the article is tongue in cheek, the underlying concern is that the names of studies may not, in fact, correspond to the actual results they yield.