The argument that to prevent serious patient infections, the group of hospitals should apply a concentrated solution of UltraClean at all hand-washing stations throughout their hospital system, is not entirely and logically convincing because it is solely based on a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps, which has a few unproven assumptions. The author claims, via a dubious recommendation, that a concentrated solution of UltraClean produced a 40 percent greater reduction in the bateria population than the other liquid hand soaps currently used in the hospital group. Let us look at the multiple false assumptions and drawbacks that the argument contains.
First, the argument presupposes that patient infection are caused by liquid hand soaps only, whilst this is only one contributor among thousand others. According to a report by the World Health Organization, poor hygienic conditions stand to be highest contributing factor for infections among patients in hospitals, throughout the world. Clearly, only changing the brand of hand wash, will not be a solution to bigger picture problem.
Second, the argument does not address the question that which age group is considered for the study, the distribution of people of varying ages, in that age group and health condition of the age group at the time of the study. As to why this distinct and conspicuous distribution of varying ages is to be accounted for, it could be that half or even more than half of the population, considered for study, were already in good health. Absence of such distinct variation of age group study could hamper the entire study on UltraClean.
Third, the author omits the number of cases were reported, out of all the patients tested, some of them could have used other medicines to counteract the side effects and these were not detected by the testing individuals. It is presumed that, because a few samples of the people from the hospital reported fewer infections doesn't necessarily mean that when UltraClean is used by many people in the hospital, still only a few would be infected.
The argument might have been strengthened if only the author had provided with enough evidences and proven case studies to show that implementation of UltraClean hand washing soaps will reduce patient infection. One anecdote does not make an argument. Hence, the author’s argument as written fails to establish the claim.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 390 350
No. of Characters: 1986 1500
No. of Different Words: 200 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.444 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.092 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.815 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.857 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.032 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.339 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.635 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.101 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 136, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a thousand'.
Suggestion: a thousand
...ilst this is only one contributor among thousand others. According to a report by the Wo...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 325, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... the hospital reported fewer infections doesnt necessarily mean that when UltraClean i...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, if, look, second, so, still, then, third, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2041.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 389.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24678663239 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89292531155 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54498714653 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 616.5 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.342242488 57.8364921388 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.785714286 119.503703932 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7857142857 23.324526521 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.71428571429 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248291800962 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0811103751655 0.0743258471296 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.1152727195 0.0701772020484 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12679966714 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.130801078866 0.0628817314937 208% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 12.3882235529 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.