Questões de Vestibular
Sobre vocabulário | vocabulary em inglês
Foram encontradas 557 questões



Source: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/mark_twain_102859
The phrase “the world owes you nothing” means that the world
Read the text below and answer the question.
Advancing gender equity in medicine
[…]
The problem of gender inequity in medical leadership is not the result of too few candidates who are not men with the appropriate experience and training to fulfill leadership roles, nor can it be explained by merely suggesting that different genders do not have the same aspirations as men. Gender inequity is largely underpinned by socially constructed gender norms, roles and relations. For example, gender roles explain why female clinicians with children spend 100.2 minutes more per day on household activities and child care than their male counterparts. This makes it more challenging for female clinicians with children to get ahead. Gender norms explain why more men are given leadership opportunities and have stronger letters of reference than other genders. Furthermore, gender relations explain why men have fewer consequences for uncivil behaviour or for harassment in the workplace compared with other genders. A recent observational study of operating room culture evaluated the prevalence and predictors of exposure to disruptive behaviour in the operating room. Disruptive behaviour was described as a range of unacceptable workplace behaviours, including incivility, bullying and harassment. A further definition provided is “interpersonal behaviour (i.e., directed toward others or occurring in the presence of others) that results in a perceived threat to victims and/or witnesses and violates a reasonable person’s standard of respectful behaviour.” The study found that clinicians who are women report more exposure to disruptive behaviour and are substantially less confident or empowered to take action to address incivility in their hospital and university settings. Gender and sexual harassment may be associated with environments that exhibit gender inequity in pay, opportunity and promotion. Disruptive behaviour and overt harassment likely endure within our medical institutions because the offenders are often considered invaluable to the organization for their stature, leadership, productivity or reputation, and are largely not held unaccountable for their actions, which further amplifies gender inequities.
Ensuring gender equity in medicine is an issue of justice and rights. Having more physicians who are women and more women in health policy leadership also appears to enhance the provision of high-quality patient care. Large, well-conducted observational studies have shown that patients of female clinicians experience better quality of care for diabetes, and significantly lower rates of mortality, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits than those treated by male clinicians. One study considered that reasons for this may include that women spend more time with their patients, are more patient-centred in their approach and provide more evidence-based care. Two recent opinion pieces discuss research showing that female representation on corporate boards, such as hospital boards, results in more socially thoughtful decisions and less corruption. Without gender equity, we risk extinguishing creative solutions to complex health problems and, most importantly, limiting patient access to the best care.
From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034331/ CMAJ. 2021 Feb 16; 193(7): E244–E250.
Read the following infographic.

Internet: <www.vricares.com> (adapted)
In section 1, it would be correct to use Exercising instead of “Exercise”, which, despite causing a slight difference in meaning, would not change the message conveyed.
The expression “Broadly speaking” (second paragraph) indicates that what follows is a general take on the subject, without considering exceptions or specificities.
Judge the follow item concerning the ideas and linguistic features of the previous text.
In the last sentence of the first paragraph, the words “others” and “yours” are both in their plural form.
TEXT 2

Available from: www.nature.com/naturemedicine. Access: 10 Oct. 2021. Adapted.
The linking word “although” (underlined in two sentences of the text) establishes a contrast
between ideas, and it may be replaced by “but”. The alternative which correctly expresses the
ideas which are contrasted in the two sentences is:
If you take a look at my smartphone, you’ll know that I like to order out. But am I helping the small local businesses? You would think that if you own a restaurant you’d be thrilled to have an outsourced service that would take care of your delivery operations while leveraging their marketing might to expand your businesses’ brand. However, restaurant owners have complained of lack of quality control once their food goes out the door. They don’t like that the delivery people are the face of their product when it gets into the customer’s hand. Some of the delivery services have been accused of listing restaurants on their apps without the owners’ permission, and oftentimes publish menu items and prices that are incorrect or out of date.
But there is another reason why restaurant owners aren’t fond of delivery services. It’s the costs, which, for some, are becoming unsustainable. Even with the increased revenues from the delivery services, the fees wind up killing a restaurant’s margins to the extent that it’s at best marginally profitable. Therefore, some restaurants are pushing harder to drive orders from their own websites and offering special deals for customers that use their in-house delivery people.
The simple fact is that these delivery apps are here to stay. They are enormously popular and have significantly grown. I believe that restaurant owners that resist these apps are hurting their brands by missing out on potential customers. The good news is that the delivery platforms are not as evil as some would portray them. They have some skin in the game. They are competing against other services. They want their listed restaurants to profit. Maybe instead of fighting, the nation’s restaurant industry needs to proactively embrace the delivery service industry and figure out ways to profitably work together.
The Guardian. 02 December, 2020. Adaptado.
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
Text 2
Home

No one leaves
home unless home is the mouth of a shark
you only run for the border
when you see the whole city running as well
Your neighbors running faster than you
breath bloody in their throats
the boy you went to school with
who kissed you dizzy behind the old tin factory
is holding a gun bigger than his body
you only leave homewhen
home won‘t let you stay.
No one leaves home unless home chases you
fire under feet
hot blood in your belly
it‘s not something you ever thought of doing
until the blade burnt threats into
your neck
and even then you carried the anthem under
your breath
only tearing up your passport in an airport toilet
sobbing as each mouthful of paper
made it clear that you wouldn‘t be going back.
You have to understand,
that no one puts their children in a boat
unless the water is safer than the land
no one burns their palms
under trains
beneath carriages (…)

I want to go home,
but home is the mouth of a shark
home is the barrel of the gun
and no one would leave home
unless home chased you to the shore
unless home told you to quicken your legs
leave your clothes behind
crawl through the desert
wade through the oceans (…)
No one leaves home until home is a sweaty voice in your ear
saying –
leave,
run away from me now
I dont know what I‘ve become
but I know that anywhere
is safer than here.
By Warsan Shire. Disponível em: https://www.facinghistory.org/educator-resources/current-events/many-faces-global-migration#8 Excertos.
Acesso em: set. 2020.

No livro Sapiens: A brief history of humankind, do autor Yuval Noah Harari, há o seguinte trecho:
Like it or not, we are members of a large and particularly noisy family called the great apes. Our closest living relatives include chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans. The chimpanzees are the closest. Just 6 million years ago, a single female ape had two daughters. One became the ancestor of all chimpanzees, the other is our own grandmother.
(Sapiens: A brief history of humankind, 2014.)
Em trecho anterior, o autor indica que o surgimento de organismos vivos data de 3,8 bilhões de anos atrás. Comparada a essa informação anterior, a expressão “Just 6 million years ago”, presente no trecho transcrito, justifica-se por indicar que a origem da espécie humana é ____________ , pois corresponde a __________ do período do surgimento dos organismos vivos.
Os termos que completam as lacunas da frase são, respectivamente:



