生物医学研究写作中的体裁与元体裁

IF 1.8 2区 文学 Q3 BUSINESS
C. Wickman
{"title":"生物医学研究写作中的体裁与元体裁","authors":"C. Wickman","doi":"10.1177/10506519221143113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of reporting guidelines is an established yet still-evolving practice in the field of biomedicine. These documents are often linked to common methodologies (e.g., randomized clinical trials); they include multiple textual artifacts (e.g., checklists, flow diagrams) and have a history that is coextensive with the emergence and ongoing development of evidence-based medicine (e.g., as an epistemological orientation to research and decision making). Drawing on the concept of metagenre, this article examines how practitioners use reporting guidelines to define and regulate the boundaries of biomedical research and writing activity. The analysis, focusing on one prominent set of guidelines, shows how practitioners use the genre–metagenre dynamic to promote strategic intervention while upholding traditional principles and standards for evidence-based research and communication.","PeriodicalId":46414,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business and Technical Communication","volume":"37 1","pages":"140 - 173"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Genre and Metagenre in Biomedical Research Writing\",\"authors\":\"C. Wickman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10506519221143113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The use of reporting guidelines is an established yet still-evolving practice in the field of biomedicine. These documents are often linked to common methodologies (e.g., randomized clinical trials); they include multiple textual artifacts (e.g., checklists, flow diagrams) and have a history that is coextensive with the emergence and ongoing development of evidence-based medicine (e.g., as an epistemological orientation to research and decision making). Drawing on the concept of metagenre, this article examines how practitioners use reporting guidelines to define and regulate the boundaries of biomedical research and writing activity. The analysis, focusing on one prominent set of guidelines, shows how practitioners use the genre–metagenre dynamic to promote strategic intervention while upholding traditional principles and standards for evidence-based research and communication.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46414,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Business and Technical Communication\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"140 - 173\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Business and Technical Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10506519221143113\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business and Technical Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10506519221143113","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

使用报告准则是生物医学领域一种已确立但仍在发展的做法。这些文件通常与常用方法(例如,随机临床试验)相关联;它们包括多种文本工件(例如,检查表,流程图),并且具有与循证医学的出现和持续发展(例如,作为研究和决策的认识论方向)共同扩展的历史。利用元元的概念,本文探讨了从业者如何使用报告指南来定义和规范生物医学研究和写作活动的边界。该分析侧重于一套突出的指导方针,展示了从业者如何使用类型-元总体动态来促进战略干预,同时坚持以证据为基础的研究和交流的传统原则和标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Genre and Metagenre in Biomedical Research Writing
The use of reporting guidelines is an established yet still-evolving practice in the field of biomedicine. These documents are often linked to common methodologies (e.g., randomized clinical trials); they include multiple textual artifacts (e.g., checklists, flow diagrams) and have a history that is coextensive with the emergence and ongoing development of evidence-based medicine (e.g., as an epistemological orientation to research and decision making). Drawing on the concept of metagenre, this article examines how practitioners use reporting guidelines to define and regulate the boundaries of biomedical research and writing activity. The analysis, focusing on one prominent set of guidelines, shows how practitioners use the genre–metagenre dynamic to promote strategic intervention while upholding traditional principles and standards for evidence-based research and communication.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
18.20%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: JBTC is a refereed journal that provides a forum for discussion of communication practices, problems, and trends in business, professional, scientific, and governmental fields. As such, JBTC offers opportunities for bridging dichotomies that have traditionally existed in professional communication journals between business and technical communication and between industrial and academic audiences. Because JBTC is designed to disseminate knowledge that can lead to improved communication practices in both academe and industry, the journal favors research that will inform professional communicators in both sectors. However, articles addressing one sector or the other will also be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信