To the editor,
I read your editorial with great interest. I have one thought I would like to share on the topic.
My impression is that scientific papers are “dehumanized” deliberately—the writing is stilted to take both reader and author, as individuals, out of the narrative so the scientific story stands on its own. That is why there is so much passive tense (“X was done” as opposed to “We did X”), for example.
That chilly effect of language is not so much indifference to patients as it is an attempt to meet an arbitrary standard, which may dehumanize the author and the reader as well.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
(RE: Leopold SS. Editorial: words hurt – avoiding dehumanizing language in orthopaedic research and practice. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:2561–2563).
The author certifies that he, or any member of his immediate family, has no funding or commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.
All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.
The opinions expressed are those of the writers, and do not reflect the opinion or policy of CORR ® or the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons®.
About this article
Cite this article
Maltenfort, M. Letter to the Editor: Editorial: Words Hurt – Avoiding Dehumanizing Language in Orthopaedic Research and Practice. Clin Orthop Relat Res 473, 1536 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-015-4163-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-015-4163-7