A Pocket Edition for those with Large Pockets!
Written: Jun 11 '04
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Clear layout, concise definitions, very comprehensive for a "pocket" edition
Cons: Slightly bulky for a pocket edition, lack of diagrams, hard to find nowadays.
The Bottom Line: If you can find it, and excellent budget pocket medical dictionary.
|
|
|
| captaind's Full Review: Stedman's Pocket Medical Dictionary Books |
This is a bit of a departure for me – though I have reviewed 50 or so books already, this is the first reference work I have reviewed, the others all having been works of fiction. So I hope I prove capable of giving a decent review to something more serious!
This is quite an old medical dictionary (copyright 1993) and has been superseded by Stedman’s “Spellchecker” range, but for most purposes it’s perfectly usable today. Some newer terms (i.e. CJD) are not contained in the dictionary but this is unlikely to cause a problem for many people.
And there is good reason for this. The basic layout – of the words in Bold, followed by the root origin (usually Greek, symbolised by G.) and any foreign words in italics, followed by the description in normal type, is extremely easy to read and enable quick referencing without any problems. The other omissions listed near the end of the review may also have been corrected, but as these aren’t dependent on newer medical terminology I can’t assume that they have.
The book is abridged from Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, but thankfully I have found no evidence the main error in this sort of reduced volume – namely, “Leiomyomatous - See ‘Leiomyoma’” – where there is no entry for “Leiomyoma”. In fact, the definitions are almost always complete in themselves without referencing to other words in the dictionary (if you understand the terminology used, obviously.) I have not seen any reference to another expression that is missing from the dictionary.
The dictionary contains nearly 20,0000 entries (461 pages – you’d need a fairly big pocket for this to truly be a “pocket” dictionary!), and is an excellent resource for Medical Secretaries and, I would think, any early medical student (or who has not yet completed general training and chosen a specialist interest to pursue). As a general reference and reminder service it works extremely well, and considering that’s all it’s really designed to be, has to be a 5-star product. Some specialist terms are missing like “nubbin” (don’t ask me what it means, I just type it and haven’t got a bigger dictionary to hand!), and really once you decide to specialise, you’d want either one of the huge dictionaries or a specialist dictionary in addition to this one. However most of the terms commonly used in specialities such as orthopaedics, oncology, respiratory, and histopathology are contained in the Stedman’s Pocket Medical Dictionary - and I’m sure the same is true of other specialities, I just don’t know enough about them to check! (Though on second thoughts the lack of the term “radiolucency” might suggest a deficiency of radiological terminology.)
Example entry: “metas’tasis, pl. metas’tases [G. a removing] 1. The shifting of a disease, or its local manifestations, from one part of the body to another. 2. In cancer, the appearance of neoplasms in parts of the body remote from the seat of the primary tumour. 3. Transportation of bacteria from one part of the body to another, through the bloodstream or lymph channels.” Clearly laid out, concise, and understandable. What more could you ask for?
As medical dictionaries go I have no complaints about this one – it’s well set-out, contains good, accurate, and readable descriptions, and is very comprehensive considering it’s only a “pocket” edition. In addition to the dictionary itself, a brief preface, a concise guide to using the dictionary, and appendices. These are:
Comparative Temperature Scales
Temperature Equivalents
Weights and Measures
Laboratory Reference Range Values
Blood Groups
Physiological Values During Pregnancy
Symbols and Abbreviations
Drug Names
These are all useful as quick reminders or references, but are too basic to be useful for didactic teaching / learning. The Symbols and Abbreviations and Laboratory Reference Range Values are the most useful of them, though obviously it depends on exactly what information you actually need.
Omissions
While there are definitely no glaring omissions in this medical dictionary, there are a couple of small areas where it is slightly deficient. These are:
- On the whole, the dictionary keeps very much to English spellings – such as anaesthetic - whereas the (newer) American variations like anesthetic are missing. These variations are perfectly acceptable in the UK now, in fact some of them are gaining precedence over the traditional spellings – such as fetus instead of foetus. (Actually this is one of the very rare instances in which the dictionary only lists the newer spelling.) For myself, who still prefers the more traditional spellings, this is not a problem; however, if you are used to the newer spellings, you may find it slightly difficult to locate some words.
- One or two small or obscure bones and muscles are missing, such as psoas.
- The lack of any plates / diagrams (i.e. of skeletal structure, reproductive organs, respiratory / nervous / lymphatic systems) makes it less useful to medical students than it could be.
Overall
If you’re looking for a good medical dictionary, not as big or expensive as the Comprehensive Dictionaries but not missing anything very important, this is a good bet. I use it extensively in my work and would not swap it for any other small dictionary. (It’s a lot easier to handle than those big ones too!!) One final thought – it’s a bit battered but, considering its age and the amount of use it’s had over the years, it’s in amazingly good shape - top marks for durability!
Most Useful For:
Medical Secretaries
Medical Students
House Officers
Nurses
Some Use For:
Senior House Officers
Registrars
Too Simple For:
Specialist Registrars
Nurse Consultants
Consultant Surgeons / Physicians
Professors
Availability
Amazon (the UK site) only had 6 of these on offer – 3 new and 3 old – and Stedman’s own site no longer lists it – so you may have a little trouble finding it (or, of course, you may prefer a newer version). But if you can pick it up cheaply second hand it’s a real bargain.
Now if only they could invent something to help me decipher the Consultants’ handwriting…
Thanks for reading!
CaptainD
Many thanks to Bridgette (,Redlass) for adding this to the database for me – and so quickly, too! :-D
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.