Basing on the success of UltraClean soap in one of his hospital in Worktown, the director of health minister is planning to use UltraClean soap in all of his hospital chain. The decision is based on the superficial and unreliable facts.
Firstly, the letter lacks in providing additional information regarding the reduction in number of infected patient in the Worktown hospital. The patient infection may plummet in Worktown hospital due to the fact there was more hospital in the locality where the residents can go to. There might be a case that the service provided by the hospital was not satisfactory or the cost of the services provided was too expensive because of which Worktown residents abstain themselves from going to the hospital. It will be very difficult to substantiate the claim unless the author provides necessary details and evidence.
Furthermore, the author presented us with the study which shows UltraClean soap performed better than the soaps currently used in the hospitals. But the UltraClean soap sample used in the study is in concentrated form and the author has not mentioned which form of the soap will be used in the hospitals. If it is in dilute form then it might produce the same result as the soap currently used. In that case, it would not be prudent to swap the soap currently used with UltraClean soap. This details are required to fully analyze the effect of the soap.
Finally, the author not touched upon the negative affect of using UltraClean soap. On regular use, it might cause irritation or may be inimical for the skin and eye. Additionally, it might be dangerous for the children. If that is the case, then it will inadvisable to use the soap across all the hospitals in the group. Along with that evidence, the author should also provide the evidence that there is no soap in the market which is better than UltraClean.
In conclusion, the author needs to provide answers and evidences for solidifying his claim. Unless he does that, it will be imprudent to change the soap used in the hospitals.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 14, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Basing on the success of UltraClean soap in one of his...
^^
Line 1, column 122, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... director of health minister is planning to use UltraClean soap in all of his hos...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'furthermore', 'if', 'may', 'regarding', 'so', 'then', 'as to', 'in conclusion']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.234828496042 0.25644967241 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.155672823219 0.15541462614 100% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0633245382586 0.0836205057962 76% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0448548812665 0.0520304965353 86% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0369393139842 0.0272364105082 136% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.139841688654 0.125424944231 111% => OK
Participles: 0.0474934036939 0.0416121511921 114% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.68772720919 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0263852242744 0.026700313972 99% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.139841688654 0.113004496875 124% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0343007915567 0.0255425247493 134% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0131926121372 0.0127820249294 103% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2062.0 2731.13054187 75% => OK
No of words: 350.0 446.07635468 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.89142857143 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.57801047555 94% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.334285714286 0.378187486979 88% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.257142857143 0.287650121315 89% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.208571428571 0.208842608468 100% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.14 0.135150697306 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68772720919 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 207.018472906 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.474285714286 0.469332199767 101% => OK
Word variations: 48.8730085108 52.1807786196 94% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 19.4444444444 23.2022227129 84% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.3541616611 57.7814097925 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.555555556 141.986410481 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4444444444 23.2022227129 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.722222222222 0.724660767414 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 45.1587301587 51.9672348444 87% => OK
Elegance: 1.77777777778 1.8405768891 97% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.36959443532 0.441005458295 84% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.172910812903 0.135418324435 128% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.108612723984 0.0829849096947 131% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.653453846285 0.58762219726 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.136183443938 0.147661913831 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.177381781685 0.193483328276 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100099275418 0.0970749176394 103% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.521560500755 0.42659136922 122% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.083255166901 0.0774707102158 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.278515221733 0.312017818177 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0725884662463 0.0698173142475 104% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.33743842365 36% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.82512315271 187% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 3.0 6.46551724138 46% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 2.82389162562 248% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 14.657635468 109% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.