具体的な英語表現
※このチャプターは筆者の考えと経験に基づくものです。英文法の専門家からみたらおかしい点があるかもしれません。そのような場合はご指摘下さい。
- コロン、セミコロン、ダッシュ、ハイフンなど
コロン(:)とセミコロン(;) コロン(:)は何かを列記するときに使い、such asに近いイメージです。従って、コロンの後は単語などが並ぶ事が多いです。 例）We focused on the four major causes of sepsis: pneumonia, urinary tract infection, abdominal infections, and bacteremia.
セミコロン(;)は並列的な文章を繋ぎます。Howeverやthereforeなどの副詞を接続詞的に使いたい場合にも使用できます。 例）These factors might have confounded our inferences; however, we controlled for the …
ハイフンとダッシュ ハイフンはマイナス記号を一回押すと出てくる短い横棒(-) です。Door-to-doorなどのように単語を繋ぐ際に用います。
ダッシュは正確にはenダッシュとemダッシュかあります（nの文字幅のダッシュとmの文字幅のダッシュ）。en ダッシュは区間や範囲を表す場合に使い、em ダッシュは引用や省略、副題などを表す場合に使います。
ハイフンとダッシュの長さを比べてみましょう
ハイフン - enダッシュ – emダッシュ —
入力方法はMacだと ① enダッシュ：Option + - ② emダッシュ：Shift + Option + - ③ ハイフンを2回(–)入力してEnterで適宜en/emに切り替わる になります。論文ではemダッシュを用いることが多く、文章をちょっと詳しく説明したい、補足したいときに用います。よく補足事項を(***)と括弧内に書きますが、それと似たような感じです。
例）Early and successful rescue intubation approaches — e.g., the use of alternative methods, devices, and intubators — become important.
i.e., とe.g., 上記例文にもありますが、ときどきi.e.やe.g.という表記を論文で見かけます。 i.e.は”that is”で「すなわち」「言いかえれば」の意味。ラテン語のid estからきています。 e.g.は”for example”で「例えば」の意味。ラテン語のexempli gratiaからきています。
- 文頭に用いる単語一覧
※段落の最初での使用は避ける、コンマに注意 しかし、などの反語 Although ～, 〇〇 「～と言われているが、～であった」などに最も多く用いる。接続詞の場合はwhereasを用いると便利。 However, 「しかし」を強調したい場合に使用。接続詞ではないので文中で用いない。用いる場合はセミコロンで繋ぐ。 Alternatively, 「あるいは」「また」。訳書では二者択一的と書かれているが、実際には「その理由は○○が挙げられる。Alternatively, こういう理由も考えられる」のように用いる事が多い。 Nevertheless, 「（前の文章を受けて）にも関わらず」 Despite ～, 〇〇 「～にも関わらず〇〇」などで用いる。続くのは名詞または名詞節
その上、などの追加 In addition, Additionallyのように副詞一語の方が丁寧。ちょっと付け加えたい時はin addition, 「追加として」を強調したい時にはadditionally。 Additionally, Alternatively, 上記のように反語としても使えますが、メカニズムの説明などで「その理由としてが考えられる。Alternatively（または）が考えられる」というニュアンスで使うこともできます。 Furthermore, より改まった順にfurthermore > moreover > besides。Moreoverとfurthermoreは「その上さらに」という意味合いが強い。 Moreover, Besides,
〜のため、などの理由 Due to ～, 〇〇 Owing to > because of = due toの順でformal。Owing toは形式的過ぎる一方、due toは副詞句としてはあまり用いないという人もいます。 Because of ～, 〇〇 As ～, 〇〇 文頭のasはbecauseに近い働き。ただし相手が認識している事実を理由とする場合は、asを、前後の脈略がない、聞き手にとって認識外の理由を述べるときは、becauseを使います。 Since ～, 〇〇 否定文に続ける場合
同様に、反対になどの比較 Similarly, Resultsなどで「同様に」を示す Likewise, In contrast, 「～とは逆に」。真逆の事を示す。前置詞を用いる場合はto By contrast, 「～とは逆に」。真逆の事を示す。前置詞を用いる場合はwith While ～, 〇〇 「～の一方で」。接続詞なので注意
従って、などの従属 Therefore, Henceの方がややformal。Thereforeは”for this reason”、Henceは”where”の意識が強い Hence, Thereby, Formalな順にthereby > thus > as a result。 “how（このようにして）”の意識が強い。新たに書き起こした文や節の中で述べた状況が、先行する文や節で述べた内容の結果を表す場合に限って使用する。 Thus, Consequently,
その他 For example, 「例として」 In particular, particularly 「特に」 Briefly, In sum, 「簡潔に言うと」 Indeed, 「事実、～である」、前の文章を引き継いで、かつ客観的事実を示すとき。使いどころは狭い。
Section別例文集 〜Introduction〜
[一段落目] ** is a major public health problem in Japan In the last decade, / Over the past decade, ** have been widely used for ~ ** is associated with a decreased success rate on the first rescue intubation in emergency departments. ** have important implications for ~ The *** guidelines emphasizes/recommends ~ 例を挙げる時はsuch as / including / for example / e.g.などを用いる
[過去の文献を引用] Another observational study reported ~ The literature has reported ~ Several studies have reported that ~ A previous report suggested ~ Several/Multiple studies from the anesthesia and pre-hospital literature support ~ Goto et.al reportedなどは用いない（情報量が少ないため）
[目的への引き継ぎ] *** remains largely unclear, There is a compelling need to ~ There is little/no evidence to support (or refute) ~ In this context, To address this knowledge gap in the literature, To (the best of) our knowledge, To address this concern, To investigate ~
[目的] We aimed to examine whether X are associated with Y. We aimed to test the hypothesis that ~ We aimed to investigate ~ We sought to determine whether the use of an X decreases ~ We hypothesized that
- Section別例文集 〜Methods〜
[Study Design] We conducted a secondary analysis of the Japanese Emergency Airway Network (JEAN) 1 and 2 registries. This is a serial cross-sectional analysis using data from the ~ to ~. These multicenter prospective data registries were designed to describe current ED airway management across Japan. We analyzed data from two multicenter prospective registries to characterize current ED airway management in Japan between April 2010 and June 2013.
[Study Setting] The EDs of all JEAN 1 and JEAN 2 participating centers were staffed by emergency medicine physicians, except for one ED in JEAN 1 affiliated with an emergency medicine residency training program. The registries collected information on all adult and pediatric patients who underwent intubation attempts in the ED between April 2010 and June 2013.
[Ethics] The institutional review board of each participating institution approved the study with waiver of informed consent. The study was approved by the institutional ethics committee of St. Marianna University School of Medicine Hospital, and informed consent was obtained from the participants.
[Participants] We recruited ** physicians across Japan. All patients who underwent a rescue intubation were included for the analysis. ** patients were eligible for this analysis. We excluded patients who ~ and those who ~ First, we identified all adult patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for
[Measurement] The measured variables were age, sex, principal indication for intubation, intubation success or failure, and associated adverse events. Primary outcomes were ~ The primary outcome measure was success rate on the first rescue intubation attempt. The outcome of interest was ~ Other outcomes of interest were ~
[Definition] We defined “A” as B. A was defined as B. We focused solely on ~
[Analysis] For the purpose of this analysis, we classified the eligible patients into three groups based on ~ To examine the association between ~ and ~, we constructed a random effects model with binomial response and with one failed attempt as the reference. We stratified by *** We fit two analytical models. We repeated the analysis. We adjusted for patient-level confounders chosen based on biological plausibility and a priori knowledge and to account for clustering of patients at the ED level. These patient-level variables included age, sex, ~ In the sensitivity analysis, to assess the consistency of the association between the number of failed attempts and success rates on the first rescue intubation, we repeated the multivariable analysis, modeling with the number of failed attempts as dichotomous (2 or more vs. 1) and ordinal variables. To assess whether the success rate improved or declined with increase in the number of failed attempts before first rescue intubation, we used the Cochran-Armitage test.
Summary statistics were presented by means (with standard deviations [SDs]), medians (with interquartile ranges [IQRs]), and proportions (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) as appropriate. Summary statistics were conducted with JMP statistical software (version 10.0.2; SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). The random effects model was conducted with R software version 3.0.3 (R Development Core Team, Vienna, Austria), with the lme4 package to fit the random effects models.21 Two-sided P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
- Section別例文集 〜Results〜
[Patient flow] During the study period, a total of ** patients required ~ The database recorded ** patients. We excluded *** patients with ~ From 2010 to 2012, we
[Patient characteristics] Of the remaining ** patients, Overall, the median age of the patients was ** years and ***% were female. Among these (patients), Approximately half of the patients ~
The patient characteristics over the study periods are shown in Table **. The characteristics of participants are shown in Table **.
[Main result] Of ** consecutive patients, ** underwent a rescue intubation. The overall success rate on first rescue intubation attempt was ~ *** was significantly lower compared to 〜. The success rate on first rescue intubation attempts declined as the number of failed intubation attempts increased. There were no significant differences in ~ Multivariable-adjusted mortality significantly decreased from ~ to ~.
In the multivariable analysis adjusting for age, sex, principal indication, change in methods, devices, intubator specialty, and clustering of patients within EDs, success rate on ~ *** was independently associated with a decreased success rate on the first rescue intubation.
[Sensitivity Analysis] In the sensitivity analysis, the adjusted association between multiple failed intubation attempts and decreased success rates of that first rescue attempt persisted. The sensitivity analysis stratified by ~
- Section別例文集 〜Discussion〜
[結果のまとめ] We demonstrated that the success rate on the first rescue intubation attempt declined as the number of failed intubation attempts increased. In this prospective observational study using ** registry from ** to ***, we found ~ This is the first demonstration of the association between ~ and ~. This is the first study to report ~
[過去の研究では〜、を示す場合] Despite decades of intense research and major technological advances, The literature suggests that To date, most epidemiologic research on ** For example, a study reported Prior studies Several/Multiple studies using ** data have indicated that A previous study reporting a ** found Similarly, another study reported In contrast to the previous studies using By contrast, fewer studies have examined the An analysis of the ** estimated that
[本研究では〜を示す場合] In this study, In our study, The current study, Our findings were ~ Our results were ~ Our study demonstrated that ~
[理由付け] These findings collectively suggest that Our inference supports the Potential reasons for the observed association include The reasons are likely multifactorial. The reason for One may surmise It is also plausible that There are plausible mechanisms to support this conclusion To address these concerns, Our findings are more likely to reflect In agreement with these data, our study also demonstrated that
[Implications] Our findings have several implications for ~ Our observations should facilitate further investigations into ~ Our results encourage clinicians to ~ Our findings should underscore the importance of ~ We believe that our inferences are clinically plausible and likely applicable to different practice settings.
[Limitations] First, Second, Third, and Finallyのように順番に書く
The current study has several limitations. Our study has several potential limitations. *** might be confounded by unmeasured factors. These factors might have confounded our inferences. Potential confounding factors include ~ This is because ~ Although one may surmise a limited generalizability of our inferences,