[1] 奚小彭. 现实·传统·革新——从人大礼堂创作实践,看建筑装饰艺术的若干理论和实际问题[J]. 装饰. 2008(S1)
[2] 邵健. 环境艺术的通境之路 中国美术学院环境艺术设计专业教育访谈录[J]. 世界建筑导报. 2006(12)
[3] 之洁. “清华国际设计管理论坛”在京举行[J]. 装饰. 2002(11)
[4] 关于室内建筑师资格评审的上海研讨会[J]. 室内设计与装修. 2002(09)
[5] 杨全印. 关于我国20年民办教育政策的思考[J]. 黑龙江高教研究. 2002(02)
[6] 夏立宪. 长沙市早期民办大学研究[J]. 高等教育研究. 2001(01)
[7] 王大中,贺美英. 具有重大和深远意义的盛事[J]. 装饰. 2000(01)
[8] 刘伯英. 文化的殖民主义、新殖民主义和后殖民主义的释义[J]. 新建筑. 1999(06)
[9] 苗业. 如何看待建筑创作中的“抄袭”与“模仿”[J]. 新建筑. 1999(06)
[10] 董赤. 设计教育与教育设计——论吉林艺术学院环境设计艺术教学的新对策[J]. 吉林艺术学院学报. 1999(03)
室内设计毕业论文参考文献一：
[1]杨淘，王曌一.基于环境心理学的学习空间室内设计[J].设计，2018（01）：132-133.
[2]邱海东，符红柳.格式塔意向下的设计创意--以室内设计思维与装饰材料运用为例[J].设计，2018（01）：139-141.
[3]黄晟.基于互联网背景下的室内设计的课堂创新与教学反思[J].江西建材，2018（03）：208+211.
[4]王葵.室内设计教学观念的转变及教学思维创新[J].江西建材，2018（03）：229+233.
[5]赵倩红.基于工作过程系统化的住宅室内设计课程改革实践[J].天津职业院校联合学报，2017（12）：92-96.
[6]梁童，赵培，胡凯，尤明曦.室内覆盖网络智能设计审核平台研发与应用[J].电信工程技术与标准化，2018（01）：14-19.
[7]陈媛媛.论现代中式风格室内设计中漆艺的运用[J].山西建筑，2018（01）：213-214.
[8]高翌崴.对新中式的研究与新中式在室内设计中的应用[J].建材与装饰，2018（01）：96-97.
[9]王佩.浅析室内设计中的绿色环保设计[J].建材与装饰，2018（01）：113.
[10]刘青蓝.试论建筑室内设计中灯光与色彩的搭配运用[J].建材与装饰，2018（01）：115.
可以找到，你什么时候交作业
本科毕业设计论文外文翻译基本格式
论文常用来指进行各个学术领域的研究和描述学术研究成果的文章，简称之为论文。它既是探讨问题进行学术研究的一种手段，又是描述学术研究成果进行学术交流的一种工具。它包括学年论文、毕业论文、学位论文、科技论文、成果论文等。以下是我精心整理的本科毕业设计论文外文翻译基本格式，欢迎大家借鉴与参考，希望对大家有所帮助。
本科毕业设计论文外文翻译基本格式
一、要求
1、与毕业论文分开单独成文。
2、两篇文献。
二、基本格式
1、文献应以英、美等国家公开发表的文献为主（Journals from English speaking countries）。
2、毕业论文翻译是相对独立的，其中应该包括题目、作者（可以不翻译）、译文的出处（杂志的名称）（5号宋体、写在文稿左上角）、关键词、摘要、前言、正文、总结等几个部分。
3、文献翻译的字体、字号、序号等应与毕业论文格式要求完全一致。
4、文中所有的图表、致谢及参考文献均可以略去，但在文献翻译的末页标注：图表、致谢及参考文献已略去（见原文）（空一行，字体同正文）。
5、原文中出现的'专用名词及人名、地名、参考文献可不翻译，并同原文一样在正文中标明出处。
三、毕业论文设计外文翻译的内容要求
外文翻译内容必须与所选课题相关，外文原文不少于6000个印刷符号。译文末尾要用外文注明外文原文出处。
外文翻译要求：
1、外文资料与毕业设计(论文)选题密切相关，译文准确、质量好。
2、阅读2篇幅以上(10000字符左右)的外文资料，完成2篇不同文章的共2000汉字以上的英译汉翻译
3、外文资料可以由指导教师提供，外文资料原则上应是外国作者。严禁采用专业外语教材文章。
4、排序：“一篇中文译文、一篇外文原文、一篇中文译文、一篇外文原文”。插图内文字及图名也译成中文。
5、标题与译文格式(字体、字号、行距、页边距等)与论文格式要求相同。
下页附：外文翻译与原文参考格式
英文翻译 (黑体、四号、顶格)
外文原文出处：(译文前列出外文原文出处、作者、国籍，译文后附上外文原文)
Healthcare providers and patients with diabetes evaluate the efficacy of glycemic control by 2 strategies. One strategy involves self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG)1 by patients, with portable meters and continuous blood glucose monitors or sensing devices. Patients use these glucose values for daily decision-making to adjust medication doses and/or modify food intake or exercise regimens. Blood glucose fluctuates widely over minutes to hours, depending on food intake, exercise, insulin, and physical and emotional stressors. Values obtained by SMBG, therefore, do not signify average glucose (AG) concentrations. When an estimate of glucose values over time is desired, cumulative results can be downloaded from the patient’s meter in the provider’s office. These data are useful for determining whether current diabetes therapies are appropriate or need adjustment. Unfortunately, a number of barriers to blood glucose monitoring that may exist in clinical practice make it difficult to obtain an adequate amount of reliable data from patient logbooks. Barriers to SMBG implementation, as identified by patients with diabetes and their healthcare teams, include not only physical, financial, cognitive, and emotional factors, but also time constraints and inconvenience (1). In addition, patient follow-through may be lacking because of inadequate education or communication between patient and healthcare provider regarding what information is needed and why it is necessary. For this reason, it is important that hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) be measured regularly.
The second strategy, measurement of Hb A1c, provides a more accurate assessment of long-term glycemia than that obtained from SMBG. The concentration of Hb A1c, which consists of glucose attached to the N-terminal valine of the hemoglobin β chain, is relatively stable, given that the mean erythrocyte life span is approximately 120 days. Therefore, the Hb A1c value reflects the integrated glucose concentration over the preceding 8–12 weeks (2). Clinically, Hb A1c measurement is used to assess whether a patient’s glycemic target has been reached and maintained. It also predicts the progression of microvascular complications. Most patients, however, perceive diabetes as a disease of high sugar in the blood and fail to understand the relevance of hemoglobin. To facilitate communication with their patients, many healthcare professionals translate Hb A1c values into average plasma glucose. Tables that convert Hb A1c to AG are available in print (e.g., the Clinical Practice Recommendations published annually by the American Diabetes Association), on Web sites, in hospitals, in doctors’ offices, and frequently in the laboratory coat pockets of members of the diabetes healthcare team.
The numbers most widely used in these Hb A1c/AG conversion charts were derived from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (3). Notwithstanding a fairly large population (1441 individuals) and the merits of this trial, the study was confined to patients with type 1 diabetes and was not designed to measure AG. In this trial, capillary glucose data were collected and recorded only from quarterly 7-point glucose profiles over a mean of 6.5 years, for a mean of approximately 182 values per patient (4). Therefore, a prospective multinational study was performed to evaluate the relationship between Hb A1c and AG (5)(6). AG was assessed by a combination of SMBG and continuous glucose monitoring, with approximately 2700 glucose measurements obtained for each participant. The results of the study revealed a strong linear relationship between AG and Hb A1c (5). The study provided a linear regression equation that allows Hb A1c values to be converted to AG. No significant differences in the equation were observed among individuals for any characteristic, including age, race, sex, presence or absence of diabetes, type of diabetes, or ethnicity (5). Analogous to essentially all clinical studies, this study had some limitations, including an inherent limitation to accurately measure AG, the small sizes of ethnic groups, and the absence of children and pregnant women. Nevertheless, the study provides the most accurate means to date for converting Hb A1c to AG.
Several publications reveal that only 25%–35% of patients with diabetes know their Hb A1c values (7)(8). Although an increased Hb A1c value is a good indicator of a need to advance therapy to prevent diabetes complications, healthcare professionals may feel that making therapeutic changes is their responsibility and thus spend little time explaining the Hb A1c test to patients. Yet, it is clear that a patient’s understanding their glucose targets and actually agreeing with a therapy change are critical to long-term success (9). In simple terms, the Hb A1c concentration indicates if a change in therapy is needed, but the SMBG results determine what specific changes are most appropriate for a given patient. Although there are numerous anecdotes about communicating Hb A1c results as AG to patients, objective data are limited. Perhaps the best publication is that of a survey performed in the UK among 111 patients attending a hospital diabetes clinic (10). Patients were provided with information relating to the association between Hb A1c and AG. At the end of the approximately 7-month study, patients with poorly controlled diabetes (Hb A1c> 9%) showed a significant reduction in Hb A1c values if they were unfamiliar with Hb A1cat the initiation of the study. The magnitude of the improvement in glycemic control was greatest in those patients with the most poorly controlled diabetes. These data underscore how critical it is for patients to be educated about Hb A1c and AG, and that their understanding of these data be assessed, because AG can be a powerful tool to improve glycemic control.
Many laboratories, including several large commercial laboratories in the US, report an AG value along with the Hb A1c value. To obtain objective information regarding current reporting of AG, investigators included supplemental questions with the College of American Pathologists (CAP) GH2-A survey sent in April 2009. Of the 2997 laboratories that responded, 500 (16.7%) indicated that they report AG; however, only 202 laboratories used the correct formula to calculate AG from Hb A1c values. Although the data reflect only laboratories that participate in CAP proficiency testing, it appears that AG is fairly widely used.
In conclusion, information about the relationship between Hb A1c and estimated AG will ultimately benefit the patient’s management of diabetes. The following will facilitate this process: (a) Clinical laboratories should report an AG estimate along with Hb A1c values for those who find this information useful in guiding diabetes management; (b) it is essential that laboratories use the correct formula to calculate AG; and (c) it is important for clinical laboratorians to communicate with clinicians, diabetes educators, and other healthcare providers to enhance the care of patients with diabetes. Enhanced communication between laboratory clinicians, healthcare providers, and patients regarding the value of Hb A1c and its relationship to estimated AG will promote positive patient outcomes, as well as enhance each individual’s understanding and ability to manage his or her diabetes more effectively.
