Use the word "associated"

[Mazladuk]

Apologies in advance if I have posted in the wrong section.

I was wondering how is the word "associated" correctly used. I used the word in one my examinations to describe some pathology and subsequently failed. My appeal rests on how the examiner may have misinterpreted what I have wrote.

In Summary:

I was given a slide of a particular structure of the eye. I was asked to describe it and then to make a diagnosis. The correct diagnosis was Disc Atrophy. I suggested a possible cause for the Disc Atrophy, which is Pappilloedema. This condition eventually results in Disc Atrophy.

Anyway, I recorded my diagnosis on the exam paper as "Pappiloedema associated Disc Atrophy". Given that it was under exam conditions, I wasn't able to elaborate fully to write what I fully intended i.e. "Disc Atrophy which has resulted from an episode of Pappiloedema". The examiner has taken what I wrote as suggesting it was Pappiloedema with Disc Atrophy.

Now, given what I have wrote and what I intended to mean, I was wondering, is there any difference, have I used the word "associated" in an incorrect way?

[Yankee]

Hi mazladuk

It seems to me that your wording wasn't too bad. It would have been clearer with a hyphen, though:
Pappiloedema-associated Disc Atrophy

I would argue with the examiner that if you had meant that Pappiloedema was your diagnosis, you would have added the word with: Pappiloedema with associated Disc Atrophy

In my opinion, without the word with, then your diagnosis must be understood as Disc Atrophy (even without the hyphen )

Just my I'm-no-medical-expert opinion.

Amy

[Mazladuk]

Thanks for your points Yankee...I think il add that in my appeal....I don't think you need to be a medical expert, as I felt the problem lay with the linguistics of the answer..