Event: “Cloud and Social Networking in Healthcare: What are the leaders doing?”

9 July 2012, London, United Kingdom.

Friday, June 15th – DocCom, provider of the first cloud-based enterprise social networking platform exclusively for healthcare, today announces that it is partnering with Microsoft to co-host an exclusive event for healthcare professionals that will explore the practical issues, potential pitfalls and transformative opportunities of cloud and social networking for healthcare. The half-day forum, entitled “The Cloud and Social Networking in Healthcare: What are the leaders doing?” is being held on Monday 9th July at Microsoft’s London offices in Cardinal Place. Attendance is encouraged from Medical Directors, CEOs and CIOs from NHS Trusts, and frontline clinicians and healthcare managers are also welcome to attend. Spaces are strictly limited and can be reserved by emailing events@doccom.info to register.
DocCom and Microsoft are hosting this key event to provide healthcare decision-makers with expert analysis of the practical application and benefits of cloud and social technologies in a clinical context, offering clear guidance on how healthcare organisations can harness the future of secure healthcare communication. DocCom will be presenting an overview of its cloud-based enterprise social networking solution for healthcare, which is built on the latest Microsoft Development Stack for enterprise grade security and compliance. The half-day session will feature key user case studies from DocCom’s customers, including Peter Aitken, Lead for Improvement at NIHR CLAHRC Southwest Peninsula, who will talk about the importance of Insight when trying to change human behaviour in healthcare; Kevin Cleary, Medical Director East London NHS Foundation Trust and Former Medical Director NPSA, who will be demonstrating how networks can improve safety by disseminating safety information; and Dr Clare Wedderburn, Associate Dean at Dorset GP, who will be exploring how the new relationships between acute and primary care will impact coordination and communication. With a strong focus on security and information governance issues, Nick Umney, Technical Specialist for Cloud at Microsoft, will give his insight on the opportunity cloud presents for healthcare, while Dr Jonathan Bloor, co-founder and medical director of DocCom and Dr Jonathon Shaw, co-founder and managing director of DocCom, will share their vision of how secure social networking can be used to make healthcare a safer and more efficient place.

Founded by doctors, DocCom is taking the very best social networking technology and applying it to the unique requirements of healthcare professionals – empowering healthcare teams to securely find, collaborate, communicate and share with each other effectively, and giving healthcare organisations the tools and insight to solve specific business problems in safety and efficiency. A 2011 NHS staff survey revealed that only 26 per cent of respondents felt that communication between senior managers and staff is effective, and less than a third (30 per cent) reported that senior managers act on feedback from staff. This backs up research carried out by DocCom which found that 90 per cent of Medical Directors have a problem communicating with their doctors. This frustration, caused by the lack of fit-for-purpose online communication platforms, has led to some staff taking the initiative to engineer their own “workaround” solutions, including use of third-party, non-healthcare-specific software and, in some cases, inappropriate use of social networking platforms such as Facebook – with potentially calamitous implications for data protection and patient confidentiality.

“Social networking and cloud technologies are now a fact of modern life, and innovators in the healthcare industry are now realising that these platforms can deliver immense benefits to healthcare teams, if harnessed in a secure, reliable and responsible way,” comments DocCom co-founder and medical director Dr Jonathan Bloor. He continues: “Effective communication saves lives, time and money. The impact of the human and financial costs associated with the poor organisational and cross-industry communication in healthcare is being clearly felt across all levels of healthcare delivery, from frontline staff to senior management. This event is aimed at helping medical directors and healthcare IT professionals to understand how an enterprise social networking system that is fully standards-compliant – and supported and endorsed by key healthcare management – can significantly improve clinical safety and efficiency within their own organisations.”

About DocCom
DocCom provides the first enterprise networking solution specifically designed to help healthcare professionals to connect, communicate and collaborate. DocCom is combining the best attributes of social and enterprise networking to create secure, cloud-based, healthcare-focused tools that can be accessed anytime, anywhere, and via any device – supporting busy people delivering critical care. DocCom’s secure software solutions are designed by doctors who understand the unique privacy and operational challenges involved – making life easier for healthcare teams and clinical practice safer and more effective.

How (not) to contact a translation company

This article has been at the back of my mind for ages and at the bottom of the articles priority list, but after receiving the same email from the same translator eight times since 9:00 this morning (it’s 1 p.m. now, just to give you an idea) and though I know it will not stop those translators who have been spamming us for months (yes, spamming), I feel it needs to be written – some may find it basic and I apologize in advance to them, but it seems it’s not that basic for many.

So here we go. Of course it is perfectly normal for translators to send their CVs to agencies, to get known, to say “Hey guys, I exist” in an industry where gaining visibility is anything but easy. We receive about two to three spontaneous applications per day, and sometimes a true gem may be found among them, someone who becomes one of “our” translators. By no means do we want to stop receiving applications, quite the contrary. So, just to be clear, I am not questioning the “why” of applications here; we are on your side. But what matters is the “how” – and here, take our word for it, is where many translators get it wrong.

When agencies don’t answer, most translators think it is because we are drowning in applications every day. I’m talking here about spontaneous applications. For most of the smaller, specialized agencies, like us, three unsolicited applications on average per day is not exactly ‘drowning’ and we at GxP do actually take the time to read every single one of them. However, when the application is clearly sent via a mass-mailing system and the contents do not match our needs at all, why should we reply? It feels like being spammed with something we don’t need.

So here’s tip 1: don’t send out mass-mailings to agencies. You’re just spamming them when doing so – at least that’s how it may feel for them.

Logically, the second tip is to personalize the email as much as you can. I always reply to applications starting with “Dear [title plus last name or first name]“, even if the translator applying does not match our needs at all. After all, it’s only normal to reply to someone who took the time to research the company, who we are, our names, etc. Starting an email with things like ” Dear Sirs”, “Dear Mrs or Miss” etc. is, um, off-putting. If you can’t find the name of the person who is going to receive your email, then be creative, something like “Dear [Agency name] Team” for example – something nice, warm and attention-getting. Personally, I’m much more likely to read until the end of an email starting with “Dear GxP Team” rather than one starting with “Dear Sir or Madam”.

So, tip 2: personalize the email as much as you can, which means doing a minimum of research about the agency.

Which brings me to the third point: also research what the agency does. If an agency clearly states on their website, ProZ profile, etc., that they are doing only medical translations and you are specialized in architecture and household appliances, applying is probably a waste of your time – and theirs. Even worse, it shows you did not research the agency at all and if they ever coincidentally get a job from an end-client that fits your areas (you never know, a medical devices company might need a different text translated), they might not contact you because you will be remembered as a “spammer”. So, take the extra few minutes to research what exactly the agency does.

Of course a medical translation agency does not only need medical translators. Sometimes, their own clients need a contract translated, user manuals, etc. Use your best judgment; if there’s a link, even small, between your area of expertise and theirs, it may be worth a shot to apply. If you do, be sure to phrase it this way, for example: “I see you work in the medical field – I myself am a legal translator, but if your clients ever need agreements/contracts translated, feel free to contact me…” etc.

Tip 3: research the working fields and areas the agency works in and trust your common sense : if your fields have nothing to do with theirs, applying may be a waste of time. Ask yourself whether your expertise may still be useful to them (e.g., medical instruments manufacturing companies still need contracts, user manuals, marketing brochures, annual financial reports, etc. to be translated). If this is the case, say so in the application email to show you have done your homework, that you are aware your fields are not entirely compatible but that they might need you sooner or later.

Next is the content of the actual email. Don’t recite your CV; remember, you’re enclosing it. Keep the email short and to the point, you want to make the PM curious enough about you to want to open your CV attachment. So, if you’re applying to a legal translation company and you’re a former lawyer, then that info is the only thing you need to put in the email. Ditto if you weren’t a lawyer in a former life, but already have some large or highly specialized projects behind you – put the most mouth-watering ones in the body of the email. In short, what makes you different from another translator?  The same goes for your language pairs – where you learned English is irrelevant (“I spent 2 years as an au pair in London when I was 18″), but your working pairs should be right there – personally, it’s very annoying having to search everywhere in the email and the CV to find a translator’s language pairs. They are the first elements that differentiate you from other translators, so highlight them.

So, tip 4: Keep the email short and simple, but to the point. The basic, yet important facts about you as a translator should be right there: language pairs, specialties and experience in these fields. No need for a long list of past projects in the email; this is what your CV is for. Just include the most “mouthwatering” experience you have. Remember, what you want is to capture the attention of the PM reading your email, so that they want to learn more about you and open your CV. The first few seconds after they open your email are the most important: this is when they decide if they want to know more.

Last but not least: don’t spam. If an agency doesn’t reply, it’s pointless to send the same copy-paste email over and over and over again (even more so if they have actually replied at one point). Pointless and extremely annoying. And copy-pasting the entire email you sent and putting it in a LinkedIn invitation is even more annoying. If you want to connect on LinkedIn or other sites with the PM you already contacted, don’t copy-paste the email you already sent to that person. Keep the invitation text simple, it’s an opportunity for you to remind them that you exist: “Hi, I contacted you a while ago about my translation services. I’d like to connect with you here as well and look forward to having you in my professional network”. You’re trying to get the person to be interested in your services, so don’t do it online using an approach you wouldn’t use if you had met that person in the flesh at a translation conference.

Tip 5: Keep a clean and up-to-date list of your prospects in which you enter whom you have contacted and when, whether they replied, and what the reply was. Send a follow-up email every six months for example, in the event you don’t receive a reply, but make sure it’s a different email (“I was wondering if you had received my email from last January in which I offered my translation services”). Don’t resend the exact same text you have already sent – and the same goes for social network invitations.

---

On the topic of translators’ CVs, I can only recommend these two very useful resources from my friend Marta Stelmaszak from Wantwords (she’s the expert for translators’ CVs!):
CVs and Cover Letters that Work (Webinar replay)
Download her e-book: How to write a translator’s CV

Language Barriers to Health Care in the United States

This perspective article was written and published back in 2006 by Glenn Flores, M.D. in the New England Journal of Medicine (N Engl J Med 2006; 355:229-231 - July 20, 2006) yet it remains dramatically and sadly true today, 6 years later.

A 12-year-old Latino boy arrived at a Boston emergency department with dizziness and a headache. The patient, whom I’ll call Raul, had limited proficiency in English; his mother spoke no English, and the attending physician spoke little Spanish. No medical interpreter was available, so Raul acted as his own interpreter. His mother described his symptoms:

“La semana pasada a el le dio mucho mareo y no tenía fiebre ni nada, y la familia por parte de papá todos padecen de diabetes.”(Last week, he had a lot of dizziness, and he didn’t have fever or anything, and his dad’s family all suffer from diabetes.)

“Uh hum,” replied the physician.

The mother went on. “A mí me da miedo porque el lo que estaba mareado, mareado, mareado y no tenía fiebre ni nada.” (I’m scared because he’s dizzy, dizzy, dizzy, and he didn’t have fever or anything.)

Turning to Raul, the physician asked, “OK, so she’s saying you look kind of yellow, is that what she’s saying?”

Raul interpreted for his mother: “Es que si me vi amarillo?” (Is it that I looked yellow?)

“Estaba como mareado, como pálido” (You were like dizzy, like pale), his mother replied.

Raul turned back to the doctor. “Like I was like paralyzed, something like that,” he said.

If Raul received inappropriate care owing to his misinterpretation, he would not be alone. One interpreter, mistranslating for a nurse practitioner, told the mother of a seven-year-old girl with otitis media to put (oral) amoxicillin “in the ears.” In another case, a Spanish-speaking woman told a resident that her two-year-old had “hit herself” when she fell off her tricycle; the resident misinterpreted two words, understood the fracture to have resulted from abuse, and contacted the Department of Social Services (DSS). DSS sent a worker who, without an interpreter present, had the mother sign over custody of her two children. Clearly, catastrophes can and do result from such miscommunication.

Some 49.6 million Americans (18.7 percent of U.S. residents) speak a language other than English at home; 22.3 million (8.4 percent) have limited English proficiency, speaking English less than “very well,” according to self-ratings. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of Americans who spoke a language other than English at home grew by 15.1 million (a 47 percent increase), and the number with limited English proficiency grew by 7.3 million (a 53 percent increase, see graph). Percentages of Americans Who Speak a Language Other Than English at Home or Who Have Limited English Proficiency.). The numbers are particularly high in some places: in 2000, 40 percent of Californians and 75 percent of Miami residents spoke a language other than English at home, and 20 percent of Californians and 47 percent of Miami residents had limited English proficiency.

Yet many patients who need medical interpreters have no access to them. According to one study, no interpreter was used in 46 percent of emergency department cases involving patients with limited English proficiency. Few clinicians receive training in working with interpreters; only 23 percent of U.S. teaching hospitals provide any such training, and most of these make it optional. Data collection on patients’ primary language and English proficiency is frequently inadequate or nonexistent. Although no federal statutes require the collection of such information, no statute prohibits it, either.

Language barriers can have deleterious effects. Patients who face such barriers are less likely than others to have a usual source of medical care; they receive preventive services at reduced rates; and they have an increased risk of nonadherence to medication. Among patients with psychiatric conditions, those who encounter language barriers are more likely than others to receive a diagnosis of severe psychopathology — but are also more likely to leave the hospital against medical advice. Among children with asthma, those who confront language barriers have an increased risk of intubation. Such patients are less likely than others to return for follow-up appointments after visits to the emergency room, and they have higher rates of hospitalization and drug complications. Greater resources are used in their care, but they have lower levels of patient satisfaction.

Inadequate communication can have tragic consequences: in one case, the misinterpretation of a single word led to a patient’s delayed care and preventable quadriplegia. A Spanish-speaking 18-year-old had stumbled into his girlfriend’s home, told her he was “intoxicado,” and collapsed. When the girlfriend and her mother repeated the term, the non–Spanish-speaking paramedics took it to mean “intoxicated”; the intended meaning was “nauseated.” After more than 36 hours in the hospital being worked up for a drug overdose, the comatose patient was reevaluated and given a diagnosis of intracerebellar hematoma with brain-stem compression and a subdural hematoma secondary to a ruptured artery. (The hospital ended up paying a $71 million malpractice settlement.)

In 1998, the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health and Human Services issued a memorandum regarding the prohibition, under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, against discrimination on the basis of national origin — which affects persons with limited English proficiency. This memorandum states that the denial or delay of medical care because of language barriers constitutes discrimination and requires that recipients of Medicaid or Medicare funds provide adequate language assistance to patients with limited English proficiency. In 2000, a presidential executive order was issued on improving such persons’ access to services. Thirteen states currently provide third-party reimbursement (through Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program) for interpreter services. Unfortunately, most of the states containing the largest numbers of patients with limited English proficiency have not followed suit, sometimes citing concerns about costs. Although the Office for Civil Rights issued guidelines in 2003 that seem to allow health care facilities to opt out of providing language services if their costs are too burdensome, Title VI provides no such exemption.

Ad hoc interpreters, including family members, friends, untrained members of the support staff, and strangers found in waiting rooms or on the street, are commonly used in clinical encounters. But such interpreters are considerably more likely than professional interpreters to commit errors that may have adverse clinical consequences. Ad hoc interpreters are also unlikely to have had training in medical terminology and confidentiality; their priorities sometimes conflict with those of patients; and their presence may inhibit discussions regarding sensitive issues such as domestic violence, substance abuse, psychiatric illness, and sexually transmitted diseases. It is especially risky to have children interpret, since they are unlikely to have a full command of two languages or of medical terminology; they frequently make errors of clinical consequence; and they are particularly likely to avoid sensitive issues. Given the documented risks associated with the use of ad hoc interpreters, it is of concern that the 2003 guidance from the Office for Civil Rights states that such use “may be appropriate.”

Later this year, the California legislature will consider a bill prohibiting state-funded organizations from using children younger than 15 years of age as medical interpreters. Leland Yee, the California speaker pro tempore, proposed the bill, prompted by his experiences interpreting for his mother and, later, as a child psychologist. The bill requires organizations receiving state funding to establish a procedure for “providing competent interpretation services that does not involve the use of children.”

Although this legislation may emerge as a state model, as an unfunded mandate, it will have limited power to improve care. Perhaps the time has come for payers to be required to reimburse providers for interpreter services. The provision of adequate language services results in optimal communication, patient satisfaction, outcomes, resource use, and patient safety. A 2002 report from the Office of Management and Budget estimated that it would cost, on average, only $4.04 (0.5 percent) more per physician visit to provide all U.S. patients who have limited English proficiency with appropriate language services for emergency-department, inpatient, outpatient, and dental visits. This seems like a small price to pay to ensure safe, high-quality health care for 49.6 million Americans.

SOURCE INFORMATION

Dr. Flores is director of the Center for the Advancement of Underserved Children and a professor of pediatrics, epidemiology, and health policy at the Medical College of Wisconsin and the Children’s Research Institute of the Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.

Glenn Flores, M.D.- New England Journal of Medicine 2006; 355:229-231 July 20, 2006 - original article: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp058316

GxP will be attending Hit Paris and Hôpital Expo 2012

 

 

 

 

We are pleased to announce that we will be travelling to Paris from May 21st to 23rd to attend the Hit Paris and the Hôpital Expo Trade Shows this year again.

Here’s the HIT Paris editorial from Stéphane Pic-Pâris, Event Director

Simultaneously an Exhibition and a Conference, Hit Paris has firmly established its position as the leading event dedicated to technologies and information systems applied to health.
Information systems have become a crucial factor in health organisation strategy. Long limited to management and office automation applications, hospital IT systems have now become routine tools of the trade and decision-making aids.

For 4 unifying and cross-cutting days, from 22 to 25 May, 2012, Hit Paris and HOPITAL EXPO remain the first – and leading – business event bringing together buyers, decision-makers and users, as well as institutional and industrial players around the central themes represented by the implementation of shared information systems hinged around patient care and electronic communication.
Exhibitors will therefore have a wealth of opportunities for direct contact with their core target having gathered for the occasion.

This 6th edition of the event will be an opportunity for participants to understand, learn, debate and share their experiences – in the form of workshops, lectures, business paths – focusing on the challenges posed by digital technologies and services.

2012 objective:
Modernise and simplify exchange.Make HIT Paris more open to community medicine and private-practice health professionals/Reinforce Community-Hospital communication.

In 2012, Hit Paris is further consolidating its image as a showcase for cutting-edge technologies and a catalyst for projects and is proposing a number of events and novelties: Hit.TV, the Hit Cyber Café, new business paths, the Hit Awards, new themed spaces, innovative and dynamic services that you can discover on the pages that follow.

Source http://www.health-it.fr/index.asp

Complete info about the event: http://www.health-it.fr/

Google Translate: 200 million monthly users

Google Translate had barely celebrated its 6th birthday that it reached  200 million monthly users, as Google announced earlier this week.

Franz Och, research scientist at Google Translate: ”In a given day we translate roughly as much text as you’d find in 1 million books. To put it another way: what all the professional human translators in the world produce in a year, our system translates in roughly a single day (…) We imagine a future where anyone in the world can consume and share any information, no matter what language it’s in, and no matter where it pops up.”

Wow. Imagine…What all the professional human translators in the world produce in a year, the Google Translate system translates in in one day.

Of course this is a simplistic view, and of course Google Translate can’t quite do what we do. The job of a professional, specialized translator goes beyond simply translating words and putting them in the right order to make a sentence out of it. Of course the machine does not have the background and the technical knowledge to translate a specific technical document. Of course the machine is not aware of specific terminology specified by the client. Of course the machine does not have the cultural knowledge allowing it to do much more than just translate, but adapt to the target audience/market. Of course. And of course – and this is a very important point – Google Translate is one thing, it’s great to translate “I love you into 64 languages”but there are many LSPs and companies who developed (and are developing) their very own machine translation solutions, completely customized to professional specialized translators, with stunning results.

As a translator from the “new generation”, I am not afraid of machine translation at all. CAT-Tools always belonged to my job, I did not know “the time before CAT”. So maybe this is why I see Machine Translation as the natural, normal, next step. I am also convinced that the machine will never replace the human brains when it comes to translation. But I am convinced that we will have to evolve, that the translator’s job will evolve – and that we’ may probably be “post-editors” rather than translators in a few years. Just like when CAT-Tools came and many translators saw them as a threat, as a personal insult, as a danger, Machine Translation is coming anyway, whether we like it or not – and my opinion is simple: MT is not a threat. MT is the next logical step. MT is a very powerful tool that can really help us do our job faster and better. So why not adapt and make it our best ally?

Bottom line: Machine Translation is coming – it’s actually already there – and it’s getting better and better. Exactly how long will half of the industry pretending it’s not happening?

Just my two cents.

Anyway, for those interested in knowing more about Google’s projects and plans for the future of Google Translate, here’s the blog post from Franz Och on the Google Team blog.

Breaking down the language barrier—six years in

“The rise of the web has brought the world’s collective knowledge to the fingertips of more than two billion people. With just a short query you can access a webpage on a server thousands of miles away in a different country, or read a note from someone halfway around the world. But what happens if it’s in Hindi or Afrikaans or Icelandic, and you speak only English—or vice versa?

In 2001, Google started providing a service that could translate eight languages to and from English. It used what was then state-of-the-art commercial machine translation (MT), but the translation quality wasn’t very good, and it didn’t improve much in those first few years. In 2003, a few Google engineers decided to ramp up the translation quality and tackle more languages. That’s when I got involved. I was working as a researcher on DARPA projects looking at a new approach to machine translation—learning from data—which held the promise of much better translation quality. I got a phone call from those Googlers who convinced me (I was skeptical!) that this data-driven approach might work at Google scale.” (Read more)

Translators fight the fatal effects of the language gap

Translators fight the fatal effects of the language gap

Volunteers translating health messages from English into local languages are providing a vital service for NGOs and freeing up millions of extra dollars to be used for medical aid.

Lori Thicke had an epiphany in Thange in eastern Kenya when she saw Aids orphans playing in front of posters with advice on Aids prevention. “The posters carried excellent advice, but they were in English, a language that people didn’t understand,” she said.

What was the use of this information provided by well-meaning NGOs, she wondered, if the people they were trying to reach could not read English. “People are delivering aid every day in Africa in English, French and Portuguese,” said Thicke. “That is fine for the educated elite, but they don’t need aid. It is the parents among the poor who need the information on symptoms of malaria.”

She saw the fatal effects of the language gap in India too, where mothers could have saved their children from dying from diarrhoea if they had followed the simple advice on health brochures and leaflets.

Thicke, a Canadian who came to Paris to write the great Canadian novel but founded a translation company instead, had pinpointed a glaring but little-noticed paradox in the information revolution. Thanks to the internet and mobile phones, knowledge and information is disseminated far and wide and at speed. But that knowledge is wasted unless understood by those who need it most.

Translators without Borders was founded by Thicke and Ros Smith-Thomas in 1993 after Médecins sans Frontières, the medical NGO, asked her company, Lexcelera, to work on a translation project. She asked if they needed translation often, and if giving them the words for free would be like a donation. They said yes to both questions, and TWB was born. But until that moment in Kenya two years ago, the group dealt mostly with European languages. Now Thicke is determined to bridge what she calls the “language last mile” in the developing world.

One of the group’s current projects is to teach sex workers in the Kibera slum of Nairobi, Kenya, to translate material in English on sexually transmitted diseases into languages such as Swahili, Luo and Kikuyu. The project started last week, with Simon Andriesen, a specialist on medical translation who is on the TWB board. He will teach about 125 women from Kibera, who speak different languages, to translate four-page brochures in English into the different Kenyan languages.

“He is teaching them translation skills so they can reach their own people,” said Thicke. “All the girls from Kibera represent different languages. They have been recommended to us by a health NGO and their job is to pass on information to other girls. We want to provide brochures in a language that can be understood so it doesn’t get thrown away.”

Paul Warambo, a recent masters graduate in the Kiswahili language living in Nairobi said: “The health translators training has come at a time when the country urgently needs translators in every sector, but especially in the health sector where little information is available in languages that can be understood by the majority of Kenyans.”

TWB is working on an even more ambitious project with Wikipedia. The aim is to take Wikipedia entries on the most important health topics, turn them into simple English and then translate them into as many languages as possible. The articles will then be accessible for free on mobile phones through new agreements betweek Wikimedia, which runs Wikipedia, and telecoms operators. A number of Wikipedia articles covering dengue fever, Aids, malaria, cholera and tuberculosis are awaiting translation from TWB’s army of volunteers.

The group has about 2,000 translators, who have passed its translation tests. Indian languages are well served but Africa is a big gap, with only about 15 of TWB’s translators able to deal with African languages. Africa has more than 2,000 different languages, such as Amharic, Swahili and Berber, spread across six major language families. Nigeria alone has more than 500 tongues spoken within its borders.

Until the 2010 Haiti earthquake, TWB had limited reach. But the crisis revealed not only the need for translations from thousands of aid groups that need humanitarian translations but also a critical mass of translators willing to help.

So the group created an online platform to bring the two communities together. Last year, ProZ.com, the world’s largest translator organisation, created an automated translation centre for TWB so it could broaden its reach. Approved NGOs can now post translation projects such as field reports, treatment protocols and websites. Alerts then go out to the translators in those language pairs. Those who are interested in the work of that particular NGO will take on a project, translate it, and return it to the platform for delivery. Most of the projects are picked up within 15 minutes.

Translators without Borders can easily handle projects for 100 non-profits at a time, but as its volunteer community grows, so does its capacity. Over the years, it has donated almost $3m in translation services, which means that money went towards medical supplies, vaccines, rehydration kits and more.

“We are working to build a world where knowledge doesn’t have borders,” Thicke said. “With technology, and cellphone penetration in Africa, we have the potential to spread knowledge, but no one is talking about how people are getting information even if they are connected. People die not just of disease but from a lack of knowledge on how to avoid getting sick.”

Mark Tran, “Translators fight the fatal effects of the language gap”, The Guardian (guardian.co.uk), April 11,2012

View the original article on the Guardian website here . We’d like to thank the author, Mark Tran, for allowing us to reproduce it here on the Stinging Nettle. Some in our staff are volunteering for Translators Without Borders themelves and this article is a very good tribute to Lori and to TWB and the amazing work they do everyday along with their volunteers.

Medizinische Übersetzer – keine Ausnahmen von der Regel

Armbruster, Siegfried (2011). Medizinische Übersetzer – keine Ausnahmen von der Regel  Veröffentlicht in: BW polyglott, November 2011, Ausgabe 2, S. 20

Die Sicht einer kleinen, hochspezialisierten Übersetzungsagentur

Pharma- und Medizintechnikunternehmen sind in besonderem Maße regulatorischen Vorga­ben unterworfen. Projekt-Verzögerungen oder Übersetzungsfehler können schwerwiegende und kostspielige Konsequenzen haben. Deshalb sind Unternehmen aus den GxP-Branchen, die die Richtlinien für „gute Arbeitspraxis” befolgen (müssen), – Großunternehmen ebenso wie zerti­fizierte Übersetzungsagenturen – auf der Suche nach der „eierlegenden Wollmilchsau” der Über­setzungsbranche – dem medizinischen Fachüber­setzer.

Idealerweise sollten medizinische Übersetzer linguistische Kompetenz, medizinisches, phar­makologisches und technisches Fachwissen, Kenntnisse der relevanten regulatorischen Ver­ordnungen, Vorschriften und Standards sowie Kenntnisse der gängigen CAT-Tools (CAT = Com­puter assisted translation) etc. besitzen, und nach ISO 9001 und EN 15038 zertifiziert sein.

Linguistische Kompetenz

Über die erforderlichen linguistischen Kompeten­zen eines Übersetzers lässt sich diskutieren, aber nach EN 15038 muss mindestens eine der folgen­den Voraussetzungen erfüllt sein:

• Formale höhere Übersetzungsausbildung
• Vergleichbare Ausbildung in einem anderen Fachbereich mit mindestens zwei Jahren doku­mentierter Übersetzungserfahrung
• Mindestens fünf Jahre dokumentierte professi­onelle Übersetzungserfahrung

In EN 15038 sind auch andere Kompetenzen fest­gelegt, wie sprachliche und textliche Kompetenz in der Ausgangs- und Zielsprache, die kontinuier­liche berufliche Weiterbildung oder die Kompe­tenzen auf dem Gebiet der Recherche.

Fachkompetenz

Wie bei den medizinischen Berufen gibt es auch bei medizinischen Übersetzern unterschiedliche Spezialisierungen. Wer sich auf die Übersetzung von Beipackzetteln und Fachinformationen kon­zentriert, ist nicht unbedingt dafür geeignet, eine Benutzeroberfläche für ein Bildarchivierungs­und Kommunikationssystem zu lokalisieren, und Spezialisten für klinische Fragebögen kennen sich nicht notwendigerweise mit chirurgischen Instrumenten aus. Ich behaupte nicht, dass man ohne medizinische Ausbildung keine guten me­dizinischen Übersetzungen erstellen kann. Wer aber auf Terminologie-Seiten im Internet im Kon­text eines orthopädischen Textes über Wirbel­säulenchirurgie zum Beispiel den englischen Be­griff „cervical” dem Gebärmutterhals zuordnet oder in einer Übersetzung schreibt „Bei Diabe­tikern besteht das primäre Behandlungsziel da­rin, möglichst niedrige Blutzuckerwerte zu er­zielen”, zeigt, dass ihm jegliches Verständnis für den Inhalt des Ausgangstextes fehlt. Dies könnte im zweiten genannten Beispiel erhebliche Kon­sequenzen nach sich ziehen, sprich Unterzucke­rung mit nachfolgendem Zuckerschock bis hin zum Tode. Eine regelmäßige Weiterbildung und fundierte Recherchekenntnisse sind deshalb un­abdingbar, um sich das entsprechende Fachwis­sen anzueignen bzw. zu erhalten.

Als hochspezialisierte Übersetzungsagentur für Medizin sind wir immer bestrebt, „den” Spe­zialisten zu finden, und Übersetzer, die in ihrem Profil angeben, dass sie in Recht, Finanzen, Mar­keting, Tourismus und Medizin spezialisiert sind, kommen gar nicht erst in die engere Auswahl.

Regulatorische Kenntnisse

Im regulatorischen Bereich haben Übersetzer wie Übersetzungsagenturen noch Nachholbedarf. Viele Normen und Richtlinien schreiben den ge­nauen Wortlaut für Übersetzungen vor, und Dis­kussionen, ob eine andere Übersetzung besser klingt als der vorgeschriebene Wortlaut, sind un­nötig. Der Kunde muss das übersetzte Dokument womöglich bei einer Zulassungsbehörde einrei­chen und jede Abweichung vom vorgeschriebe­nen Wortlaut kann zur Ablehnung führen und er­hebliche Kosten verursachen.

Regulatorische Vorgaben können sich ändern. So wurden zum Beispiel kürzlich die Standard­texte für Medikamentenbeipackzettel geändert. Übersetzer, die sich nicht regelmäßig auf der Website der Europäischen Arzneimittelbehörde (www.ema.europa.eu) über Änderungen infor­mieren, laufen Gefahr, „falsche” Übersetzungen zu liefern. Dies ist nur ein Beispiel für regulato­rische Vorgaben. Die US-Norm ASTM 2503-05 schreibt unter anderem vor, dass Produkte, die nur unter bestimmten Bedingungen in MRT-Um-gebungen (MRT = Magnetresonanztomographie) betrieben werden können, mit „MR conditional” zu kennzeichnen sind. Wer das nicht weiß (oder recherchiert), wird kaum die Übersetzung „Be­dingt MR-sicher” verwenden, die im Entwurf der DIN 6877-1:2007-12 (Magnetresonanzeinrichtun­gen für die Anwendung am Menschen) vorge­schrieben ist.

CAT-Tools

Übersetzungskosten zu senken, wird oft als der wichtigste Grund für die Verwendung von CAT-Tools genannt. Gerade in den regulierten Bran­chen ist die Konsistenz der Übersetzungen jedoch viel wichtiger. In einem Projekt für ein Pharma­unternehmen fanden wir zum Beispiel bei einem Medikament, das in sechs verschiedenen Konzen­trationen zugelassen ist, bis zu vier verschiedene Übersetzungen für die gleichen Ausgangssätze. Für die Umstellung der Dokumentation von ei­nem dokumentenbasierten System auf ein Con­tent-Management-System müssen diese Über­setzungen konsolidiert werden. Dies verursacht nicht nur einen erheblichen Aufwand bei der Da­tenkonvertierung; die Dokumente der Medika­mente, die von den Änderungen betroffen sind, müssen in ihrer geänderten Form auch von den Zulassungsbehörden genehmigt werden. Mit kun­denspezifischen Translation-Memory-Systemen können CAT-Tools dieses Problem minimieren und dadurch Kosten einsparen, die die Kosten für die Übersetzung um ein Vielfaches übertreffen.

Rollen und Aufgaben

Um als medizinischer Übersetzer oder Überset­zungsagentur mit Schwerpunkt Medizin im aktu­ellen Umfeld erfolgreich zu sein, müssen wir uns vom klassischen Rollenverständnis des Überset­zers verabschieden.

Betrachten wir einmal die Übersetzung ei­nes medizinischen Fragebogens für eine klini­sche Studie (in der Ausgangssprache 482 Wor­te). Klar, werden viele denken, die Übersetzung kann ich in ein paar Stunden machen. Aber die­se Übersetzung ist nur ein Baustein im ganzen Ablauf der Lokalisierung des Fragebogens. Schon vor Projektbeginn wird in unserer Agentur je­der Satz und jeder Begriff in einer „Begriffsana­lyse” erläutert (2123 Worte). Anschließend wird der Fragebogen von zwei spezialisierten Über­setzern übersetzt. Ein Projektkoordinator beur­teilt die beiden Vorwärtsübersetzungen (Bewer­tung der Übersetzung) und erstellt daraus eine konsolidierte Übersetzung. In der Vorwärtsüber-setzungsanalyse (2586 Worte) begründet er für jedes Segment, warum er die eine oder andere Übersetzung bevorzugt oder eine dritte Überset­zung vorschlägt. Diese Version wird durch einen Rückübersetzer zurück in die Ausgangssprache übersetzt. Die Rückübersetzung wird dann vom Auftraggeber mit dem Ausgangstext verglichen und in Form einer Rückwärtsübersetzungsanaly-se (3235 Worte) mit dem Projektkoordinator dis­kutiert, um eventuelle Kontroversen aufzulösen. Die resultierende Übersetzung wird durch einen Mediziner kommentiert und mit dem Projektko­ordinator diskutiert (ärztlicher Prüfbericht, 7059 Worte). Diese Übersetzung wird in Interviews mit fünf Patienten validiert und die Ergebnisse im Pi­lotversuchsbericht (5298 Worte) dokumentiert und diskutiert. Nach Klärung aller Fragen wird sie vom Korrekturleser kontrolliert und die Änderun­gen werden im Änderungsprotokoll (826 Worte) begründet.

Um die endgültige übersetzte Version des Fra­gebogens (556 Worte) zu erstellen, wurden ohne die E-Mail-Kommunikation und einige kleinere Dokumente mitzuzählen, Dokumente mit einem Umfang von 21 127 Worten verfasst. An dem Pro­jekt, das zwei Monate in Anspruch nahm, waren ein Projektvorbereiter (ein Medical Writer), drei Übersetzer, ein Projektkoordinator (ein Überset­zer), ein Mediziner, ein Korrekturleser (ein Über­setzer) und ein Projektmanager des Auftragge­bers beteiligt.

Maschinelle Übersetzungen werden in diesem Arbeitsablauf noch lange keine entscheidende Rolle spielen. Den großen, nicht spezialisierten Übersetzungsbüros, die „perfect” auftreten oder die die Übersetzer mit Löwenanstrengungen in die Cloud zerren möchten, droht das gleiche Schick­sal wie den Vollsortimentern im Einzelhandel, ihre Zeit ist abgelaufen. Die Arbeitsabläufe in der viel gescholtenen und durch das Internet ermöglich­ten Globalisierung verschieben das Gleichgewicht in Richtung kleiner, hochspezialisierter Teams oder kleiner, hochspezialisierter Übersetzungs­agenturen, die den Kunden qualitativ hochwerti­ge Ergebnisse liefern. Daher ist es empfehlens­wert, sich kontinuierlich weiterzubilden, denn teamfähige Übersetzer mit entsprechenden Qua­lifikationen werden zunehmend gesucht.

Armbruster, Siegfried (2011). Medizinische Übersetzer – keine Ausnahmen von der Regel  In: BW polyglott, November 2011, Ausgabe 2, S. 20

IMIA International Medical Interpreters Conference 2013 – Call for papers

The next IMIA (International Medical Interpreters Association) Conference will take place in Miami Beach, Florida, January 18-20, 2013.

The topic of the 2013 event has been chosen by IMIA members directly via poll and will be “Specialized Interpreting - Getting Beyond the Basics: Exploring Quality Interpreting for Multiple Specialties”

“The overriding mission of this conference is to offer an international forum to showcase the latest developments in the field, to investigate its opportunities and challenges, and to advance the quality in services provided to language minority patients worldwide.”

Thematic Questions:

Research:
1. What research is taking place regarding how medical interpreters are addressing specialized terminology with no term equivalents in the target language?
2. Is adequate knowledge of medical specialties a plus or a must for medical interpreters?
3. How are medical interpreters being defined in current research?
4. How much interpreting is occurring in non-specialized environments?
5. How can we narrow the divide between research and practice?

Education:
1. What medical specialties should be included in initial interpreter educational programs?
2. Are training/educational programs getting beyond the basics?
3. Is 40 hours of medical interpreter training enough to develop competency that ensures safe and accurate communication in a health care setting?
4. Can community interpreter training meet the educational needs of medical interpreters?
5. How are the established university interpreting programs responding to the growing demand for quality education in health care interpreting?

Practice:
1. What are some of the best practices in specialty subject matter expertise sharing?
2. Are interpreters specializing in one or more fields?
3. What happens when interpreters practice in a particular specialty, for example, a Women’s Health or Behavioral Health Clinic?
4. What are the benefits of specialization to interpreter practitioners?
5. How is national certification for medical interpreters affecting the profession?

Ethics:
1. What is actually happening when interpreters are called to interpret in cases of rare diseases or specialties that they are not familiar with?
2. How are medical interpreters coping with daily ethical dilemmas?
3. Interpreting for family when you are a professional. Is that ethical?
4. How do medical ethics converge with interpreter ethics?
5. How do professional interpreters who are not specialized in health care respond ethically to situations unique to the health care setting?

Continue reading on the IMIA webpage here – more information on the conference and how to reply to the call for speaker are also available on the page.

Deadline for the call for papers is April 20, 2012.

Complete info: http://www.imiaweb.org/conferences/2013callforpapers.asp

And the winner is….

It seems The Stinging Nettle totally honored its name. I was amazed at the number of aggressive, sometimes even insulting comments and e-mails we’ve been receiving since the beginning of this action – it’s just fascinating how many people felt personally attacked. Anyway – here’s the promised result ;)

Whoever works in the medical translation field should be aware of the numerous existing standards (DIN/EN/ISO…) in this industry. Often, these standards even state the exact wording of entire segments. We’ve been so far expecting from translators to be able to identify whether a piece of text is subject to a certain standard (or could be) and accordingly conduct a search or contact us and simply ask. In this specific case, the relevant standards to use were DIN EN 980:2008-08 “Symbols for use in the labeling of medical devices; German version” and the draft standard DIN 6877-1:2007-12 “Magnetic resonance equipment for human use – Part 1: Instructions for labeling items within the controlled area”.

“Keller”, though not specialized in medical device texts, submitted a translation that was the closest in line with the rules of these standards and therefore earns the 50€. “S.W” (who’s no medical translator either) and “AL” did realize that those were texts that were probably set in standards but unfortunately did not submit any proposal.  I found “Michael’s” proposal very interesting as well – he is not a translator but his translation was qualitatively not different from many proposals.

You can read all proposals here and here

What did we learn?

None of the translators who participated knew the standards. Some found them as they were researching and translated correctly but most would probably have made a “wrong” translation of the segments. It occurred to us that during our time as freelancers, no agency ever said to us that a given part of the text was subject to a given standard nor ever provided us with these standard existing translations available (though this does not completely apply for pharmaceutical texts as some agencies take the time and provide their translators with all standards). We came therefore to the decision that, in the future, we will be informing our translators when we give them a new project where standards apply and make those standards available to them.

I would like to thank all translators who participated. It was an interesting experience and we did learn something. We hope that translators in the future will also pay more attention to regulatory requirements in the medical technology field, and keep themselves up-to-date with these as well.
The next “translation survey” is already in the oven and we’d be delighted if you decide to participate again, or participate for the first time!

Und der Gewinner ist…

Die Stinging Nettle scheint ihrem Namen alle Ehre gemacht zu haben.
Ich war erstaunt, wie viele bösartige, ja sogar teilweise beleidigende Kommentare und Mails wir seit Beginn dieser Aktion erhalten haben. Es ist interessant, wer sich alles auf den Schlips getreten fühlte. Aber egal, hier die versprochene Auflösung:

Wer Übersetzungen im Bereich Medizintechnik anfertigt, sollte sich bewusst sein, dass in dieser Industrie viele Standards (DIN/EN/ISO etc.) einzuhalten sind. Diese Standards schreiben oft auch den genauen Wortlaut für bestimmte Segmente vor. Wir hatten bisher von Übersetzern erwartet, dass sie erkennen, ob ein Textteil einem Standard unterliegt/unterliegen könnte, und entweder entsprechend recherchieren oder sich an uns wenden und nachfragen. In diesem speziellen Fall wären das die DIN EN 980:2008-08 “Symbole zur Kennzeichnung von Medizinprodukten; Deutsche Fassung” und der Normentwurf zur DIN 6877-1:2007-12 “Magnetresonanzeinrichtungen für die Anwendung am Menschen – Teil 1: Kennzeichnungsvorschriften für Gegenstände im Kontrollbereich” gewesen.

“Keller”, obwohl er kein auf Medizintechnik spezialisierter Übersetzer ist, hat einen Vorschlag eingestellt, der weitgehend den Vorschriften dieser Normen entspricht und sich damit die 50 Euro verdient. “S.W” (übrigens auch kein medizinischer Übersetzer) und “AL” haben zwar erkannt, dass es sich um Texte handelt, die wahrscheinlich in Standards festgelegt sind, haben aber leider keine kompletten Vorschläge abgegeben. Interessant fand ich auch den Beitrag von “Michael”, der kein Übersetzer ist, aber einen Vorschlag eingestellt hat, der sich qualitativ von vielen anderen Vorschlägen nicht unterscheidet .
(Alle Übersetzungsvorschläge von den Teilnehmern finden Sie hier und hier)

Was konnten wir daraus lernen:

Keiner der Übersetzer, die geantwortet haben, kannte die Standards. Einige hätten die Standards wohl beim Recherchieren gefunden und richtig übersetzt. Die Mehrheit hätte die Segmente wahrscheinlich einfach “falsch” übersetzt. Bei unseren Diskussionen ist uns aufgefallen, dass uns während unserer Zeit als Freelancer nie eine Agentur darauf hingewiesen hat, dass ein bestimmter Textabschnitt in einem Standard festgelegt ist, bzw. uns diese Standardübersetzungen zur Verfügung gestellt hat (dies gilt übrigens nicht für Pharma-Texte, dort wird dies von einigen Agenturen gemacht).

Daher sind wir zu der Überlegung gekommen, in Zukunft bei unseren Projekten die Übersetzer zu informieren, dass ein bestimmter Standard zur Anwendung kommt, bzw. die entsprechenden Texte zur Verfügung zu stellen.

Zum Schluss möchte ich mich noch bei allen Teilnehmern bedanken. Wir haben einiges lernen können und hoffen, dass auch die Übersetzer in Zukunft mehr auf die regulatorischen Vorgaben im Bereich Medizintechnik achten und sich entsprechend weiterbilden.

Um einiges zu klären – das sind keine Probeübersetzungen, sondern mehr eine Art “Umfrage”, wie Übersetzer mit manchen Themen umgehen. Dies hilft uns, unsere Arbeitsabläufe zu optimieren. Hier wurde jetzt einfach klar, dass vielen Übersetzern entweder nicht klar ist, dass es Standards gibt, oder den Text nicht als Standardtext erkennen, und wir als Agentur da etwas tun müssen. Das war mir persönlich so nicht klar, da ich mich schon seit Jahren viel mit Standards beschäftige und eigentlich dachte, dass die Thematik bei unseren Kollegen präsenter wäre, was jedoch leider nicht der Fall ist. Als Agentur haben wir von keinem unserer Übersetzer eine Probeübersetzung verlangt. Ich halte da nicht so viel davon. Übersetzer lassen sich auch ohne Probeübersetzung beurteilen. Manche Endkunden verlangen, dass wir Probeübersetzungen für sie machen, dafür habe ich auch viel Verständnis, bei dem Mist, der oft produziert wird, aber in diesen Fällen geben wir die Übersetzungen als ganz normale Aufträge an unsere Übersetzer.

Ansonsten bin ich der Meinung, dass Übersetzen Teamarbeit ist, und das Ziel darin besteht, dem Kunden eine optimale Übersetzung zu liefern. D. h. auch, dass niemand in dem Team (immer) perfekt sein muss, da das Team als Ganzes stabil genug ist, um einzelne Schwächen auszubügeln. Unsere “Umfragen” dienen genau dazu, herauszufinden, in welchem Bereich Schwächen bestehen und Lösungen dafür zu finden.

Die nächste “Probeübersetzungs-Umfrage” ist schon geplant, und wir würden uns freuen, wenn Sie wieder oder erstmalig daran teilnehmen würden!