Transforming invasive bedside procedural instruction

2010 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 522-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua D Lenchus ◽  
Stephen Symes ◽  
Amir Jaffer ◽  
David J Birnbach
2004 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georges Kleiber

This study revisits the classic problem posed by the meaning of proper names, and proposes a procedural approach to this problem, by analysing the meaning of proper names as an instruction to find in long-term memory the referent that carries the proper name in question. This is a revision of my earlier theory of ‘naming predicates’ (Kleiber 1981), which captures the meaning of proper names like Louis in terms of paraphrases of the form “the x who is called Louis”. The concept of ‘naming predicate’ was meant to provide an alternative to the inadequacies of the two classic approaches to the meaning of proper names, viz. theories that analyse proper names as semantically empty (e.g. Mills, Kripke 1972) and theories that analyse proper names in terms of uniquely identifying descriptions (Frege, Russell 1956). An analysis in terms of naming predicates (‘the X called Louis’) gives proper names an abstract type of meaning, thus avoiding the disembodied sign that results from analysing them as semantically empty, and at the same time does not go to the other extreme of incoporating aspects of the referent in the proper name’s meaning, thus avoiding the well-known problems with referential identity (e.g. Tullius = Cicero) and the related puzzles of transparence and opacity. In spite of these descriptive advantages, further research has shown that there are a number of problems with the notion of ‘naming predicate’. One of these problems concerns the status of proper names in ‘naming constructions’ like I am called Louis. Applying a naming predicate analysis to such constructions either leads to infinite regression (Wilmet 1995), or — if Louis in the naming predicate ‘the x called Louis’ is regarded as a phonetic form rather than a proper name — to a denial of proper name status in the very construction that expresses the naming link between proper name and referent (Jonasson 1982). Another problem concerns the cognitive naturalness of an analysis in terms of ‘naming predicates’. While this analysis is quite natural in contexts like There is no Louis in this office, it works less well in contexts like This painting is a real Picasso and, most importantly, in prototypical uses like Louis is a painter and a sculpturer, where a naming predicate analysis solely identifies the referent as the carrier of the proper name. These problems have led me to propose a revision to the theory of naming predicates. The descriptive advantages of using the naming relation between proper name and referent as the basis of the semantic description are obvious, which means that this aspect of the theory needs to be maintained. What causes most of the problems, however, is associating this naming relation with a predicate. As an alternative, I propose to reanalyse it in a procedural sense, not as a predicate describing the referent but as a procedural instruction to look for the referent that carries the proper name. This puts proper names in the domain of indexical signs like deictic elements. Common nouns, on the other hand, are not indexical in this sense but stand for concepts, which means that indexicality only comes into the picture when deictic elements are added.


2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 368-391
Author(s):  
Stephen Jones

The present paper comments on signs of American Sign Language in the perspective of relevance theory. The main claim is that classifiers encode procedural instructions to help the addressee pick out the intended referent for the procedural referring expressions made with classifier constructions. The author explains how three classes of classifiers differently manipulate concepts to instruct the addressee to create ad hoc concepts though the use of inference, narrowing, and broadening. It is also claimed that classifier constructions do not encode a conceptual meaning, but a procedural instruction. The discussion includes illustrations of how the speaker’s using classifier constructions instead of lexical signs may increase the number of cognitive effects on the part of the addressee.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 713-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Kaplovitch ◽  
Mirek Otremba ◽  
Matthew Morgan ◽  
Luke A. Devine

ABSTRACT Background Cost is a barrier to creating educational resources, and new educational initiatives are often limited in distribution. Medical training programs must develop strategies to create and implement cost-effective educational programming. Objective We developed high-quality medical programming in procedural instruction with efficient economics, reaching the most trainees at the lowest cost. Methods The Just-In-Time online procedural program was developed at the University of Toronto in Canada, aiming to teach thoracentesis, paracentesis, and lumbar puncture skills to internal medicine trainees. Commercial vendors quoted between CAD $50,000 and $100,000 to create 3 comprehensive e-learning procedural modules—a cost that was prohibitive. Modules were therefore developed internally, utilizing 4 principles aimed at decreasing costs while creating efficiencies: targeting talent, finding value abroad, open source expansion, and extrapolating efficiency. Results Procedural modules for thoracentesis, paracentesis, and lumbar puncture were created for a total cost of CAD $1,200, less than 3% of the anticipated cost in utilizing traditional commercial vendors. From November 2016 until October 2018, 1800 online instructional sessions have occurred, with over 3600 pageviews of content utilized. While half of the instructional sessions occurred within the city of Toronto, utilization was documented in 10 other cities across Canada. Conclusions The Just-in-Time online instructional program successfully created 3 procedural modules at a fraction of the anticipated cost and appeared acceptable to residents based on website utilization.


2010 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Lenchus ◽  
S. Barry Issenberg ◽  
Daniel Murphy ◽  
Ruth Everett-Thomas ◽  
Laura Erben ◽  
...  

2022 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-34
Author(s):  
Gabriel Bittencourt de Aguiar ◽  
Gilberto Callado de Oliveira

Este artigo objetiva demonstrar a possibilidade real de colaboração processual entre o estado laico e os Tribunais Eclesiásticos. Como objetivos específicos tem-se mitigar alguns pontos desconhecidos, aproximando as possibilidades práticas e teóricas acerca de complementação e colaboração processual. Como resultados da pesquisa notou-se que mesmo diante de evidentes singularidades, é possível a colaboração entre as duas instituições, cujo livre convencimento para julgar suas lides com base nas provas licitamente obtidas na instrução processual, tanto na esfera processual penal quanto na esfera eclesial são regidas por um mesmo objetivo, visando o princípio da busca pela verdade real.   This article aims to demonstrate the real possibility of procedural collaboration between the secular state and the Ecclesiastical Courts. As specific objectives, some unknown points have been mitigated, approaching practical and theoretical possibilities about complementation and procedural collaboration. As a result of the research, it was noted that even in the face of obvious singularities, collaboration between the two institutions is possible, whose free conviction to judge their disputes based on the evidence lawfully obtained in the procedural instruction, both in the criminal procedural sphere and in the ecclesial sphere. governed by the same objective, aiming at the principle of the search for the real truth.


2016 ◽  
Vol 93 (1096) ◽  
pp. 67-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Hartman ◽  
Mary Wittler ◽  
Kim Askew ◽  
Brian Hiestand ◽  
David Manthey

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 281-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grace C Huang ◽  
Jakob I McSparron ◽  
Ethan M Balk ◽  
Jeremy B Richards ◽  
C Christopher Smith ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document