BMC Medical Education (Nov 2019)

Language of written medical educational materials for non-English speaking populations: an evaluation of a simplified bi-lingual approach

  • Tamim Alsuliman,
  • Lugien Alasadi,
  • Angie Mouki,
  • Bayan Alsaid

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1846-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Debates have arisen in various non-English speaking countries over the chosen language of instruction in medical education, whether it has to be the English language or the mother tongue. English-based education supporters argue that English is the leading international language of medicine and research, and a crucial tool for Continuing Medical Education (CME), as well as for students who seek practice abroad. On the other hand, mother-tongue-based medical education supporters present it as a way to endorse communication and comprehension between medical practitioners and health care system users, to bridge the gap between practitioners and the paramedical staff, and to overcome linguistic dualism and the language thinking disparity while studying in another. This study aimed to evaluate one of the simplified bi-lingual approaches in terms of medical-educational-written texts for a non-English speaking population: Arabic speaking medical students in specific. Methods 1546 Arabic-speaking-medical students from different countries participated in a one-step-interactive-experimental-online test. The test assessed participants’ scientific comprehension of three distinct written paragraphs: The first paragraph used conventional mother tongue (Arabic), the second combined English terminology and simplified mother tongue (hybrid), and the third used an English excerpt (English). Two multiple-choice questions (First question in Arabic, second in English) followed each paragraph. Response time was communicated for each paragraph. Participants were asked to select their favorable method. Repeated Measures ANOVA models and Paired Samples t-Test were used for statistical analysis. Results Participants scored a mean of [0.10] for the Arabic paragraph, [0.72] for the hybrid paragraph, and [0.24] for the English paragraph (P < 0.001). Results showed a significantly higher mean of points and correct answers within the fastest time for the hybrid paragraph [0.68] compared to the Arabic [0.08] and English [0.18] paragraphs (P < 0.001). Moreover, 50% of participants preferred the hybrid paragraph over the other two paragraphs. Conclusions Taking into consideration the large number of participants and the statistically significant results, authors propose that simplified Arabic combined with English terminology may present a viable alternative method for medical-educational-written texts in Arabic-speaking population.

Keywords