This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
English to French translations [PRO] Medical - Medical (general)
English term or phrase:Assign outcomes
Bonjour, possible traduction dans ce contexte ? “With XXX you can assign outcomes to your appointments” Il s’agit d’un logiciel permettant de gérer, autres autres, le calendrier des visites d’un essai. XXX est une fonctionnalité du logiciel. Merci
in fact "attribuer des résultats" makes perfect sense - in the IT jargon / the logic of database designers.
I have the feeling that this whole "instruction manual" should've been first vetted by a panel of potential end-users to make sure it makes sense to them, but that's another problem that happens often with many software "help files / instruction manuals".
when participants ARE NOT for all the whole duration of the trial on premises (which are often a section of some hospital, but cut-off from the rest of the hospital) part of the clinical trial are scheduled "visits" (appointments) where trial participant come to wherever the trial is run to be examined and the "outcome" for them at that in point in time is then observed and noted.
So in “With XXX you can assign outcomes to your appointments” the only meaning of "outcome" that can make sense is "résultat" as seen for that trial participant at that visit (obviously NOT the "résultats" of the whole trial).
The other meaning of "outcome" (in fact an abbreviation for "expected outcomes") = "objectifs" is something that is defined before the trial even starts, before it's even approved, so at the point in time when these "appointments" start happening what is inputted in the system CAN NOT BE the "expected outcomes" = "objectifs" but ONLY what really happened to the individual trial participant = "le résultat".
To me “With XXX you can assign outcomes to your appointments” makes PERFECT SENSE.
Pour revenir à la question en objet, et m’excusant envers ceux pour qui, ici, je dis des banalités, à commencer par l’auteur de la question, je voudrais simplement demander encore une fois comment on peut comprendre « attribuer des résultats à une visite du patient » ???? Cela n’a aucun sens à mes yeux dans le cadre d’une étude clinique compte tenu du fait que les visites des patients ne sont pas faites pour obtenir des résultats, mais pour traiter le patient et/ou mesurer des paramètres pour pouvoir ou non valider les OBJECTIFS de l’étude. Les RESULTATS d'un essai clinique, mon cher Daryo, sont extrapolés des données obtenues et analysées après la fin de l'étude et non lors des visites des patients :)
Mon cher Daryo, votre connaissance du FR ne vous permet pas de vous exprimer en FR, vous n’avez à l’évidence aucune formation scientifique et vous vous permettez de me conseiller de revoir les « basics » sur les essais cliniques, la partie maitresse de mon activité professionnelle quotidienne depuis plus de 30 ans ? Mon CV est disponible sur demande ; n’hésitez pas à me le demander. A propos de découverte, si vous aviez un peu de connaissance de l’Anglais scientifique, vous sauriez que « outcome » a deux traductions possibles selon le contexte : résultat et objectif. A propos de découverte, si vous aviez un peu de connaissance des études cliniques, vous n’écririez pas « You might discover that the whole point of a clinical trial is exactly what you say "doesn't exist": testing if the "outcome(s)" defined when designing the clinical trial can or can not be achieved.” Pensant que outcome soit un résultat. Un essai Clinique valide (ou non) des OBJECTIFS (outcomes) primaire(s) et secondaire(s). Au plus, dans le protocole, on pourra trouver p.ex. « résultat à l’ECOG », mais, dans ce cas, il ne s’agit pas en Anglais de « outcome » mais de « result »
that was designed to test whether some outcomes can or can not not be achieved using some new medicine or new treatment - "ça n'existe tout simplement pas" ???
May I suggest you re-re-read very carefully basics about what is a "clinical trial".
You might discover that the whole point of a clinical trial is exactly what you say "doesn't exist": testing if the "outcome(s)" defined when designing the clinical trial can or can not be achieved. EVERY clinical trial is organised like that: before even starting it, desired / expected outcomes are defined. Some trials give unexpected results, but there are ALWAYS some expected "outcomes" that are the only reason for the whole exercice.
"f the clinical trial was designed in way that there are say 3 possible "outcomes" (say A, B or C)" ça n'existe tout simplement pas Daryo. Une étude clinique, un essai clinique, ne cherche pas des résultats mais pose des objectifs à atteindre. En plus il note et évalue la survenue d'évènements indésirables, Je crains que tu ne confondes avec les "résultats", génériques, qui sont extrapolés une fois l'étude terminée.
is that at the end of each appointment you can use this software to input into the database what was the outcome for the individual clinical trial participant as observed during the appointment.
If the clinical trial was designed in way that there are say 3 possible "outcomes" (say A, B or C), this software allows at the end on the individual visit/appointment to "assign" to the patient the outcome observed during the visit (i.e. either A, B or C).
IOW strictly speaking what gets "attributed" is not the "visit's outcome" but "the patient's outcome as noted during the visit".
For example "at such date such patient presented the outcome C (say: "notable improvement")", will be expressed in this text as "assigning the outcome C to that patient's visit at that date.
peer agreement (net): -1
