An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor’s record of treating similarly afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
A doctor's record of treatments for their previous patients could demonstrate their ability to treat their future patients. Admittedly, most people would think that these records are confidential information that contains private information of both the patients and the doctors. However, the treatment records of the doctor could still be provided without perturbing the confidential private informations in it. Therefore, I agree with the author of the topic that a patient should be able to obtain their doctor's record of treating similar illness to help them determine both the doctor's competency and also their own expectation for their future medications.
Doctors are trained to treat thousands of different cases of illness. There are millions of different diseases caused by millions of different viruses, bacterias, or genetic problems in the world. Even if a doctor could be very well-known and acknowledged for their ability, it is just implausible for them to be an expert in all of the various diseases or health conditions there are in the world. It is true that most of these doctors would already have specialitazion in the first place, but nonetheless, even inside of each specializations, there are things that certain doctors are not exactly the paragon of their kinds.The problem is that in the status quo most patients have no idea what a certain doctor is not really good at. Society could easily get informations on what certain well-known doctors are expert on, but no doctors goes around announcing what they are not really good at.
Patients who are determining their doctors should be able to analyse their doctor's capability easily through their records and decide whether or not they want the doctor to treat them with their health condition. For instance, a doctor might be well-known for his research regarding diabetes type II and while that is true, he might not have the best records on treating patients with diabetes type I. Without this specific information, a patient with diabetes type I could easily choose the doctor to treat them while if they know their records they might want to find another doctor who is used to treat patients of diabetes type I successfully.
On the other hand, no one would actually be harmed by the release of these records to the patients. If privacy of previous patients are of concern, these information could easily be removed from the records that the patients would get their hands on. Nor would the doctor in particular be harmed by this. Even if a certain patient decides that they want another doctor to treat them with their illness after they perused the doctor's records. It would only let the doctor escape from possibility of failure to fulfil the high expectation of the patient if they decided to stay with the doctors without knowing their previous records in the very first place . The doctor would also not going to be so pressed about certain expectancy from the patients when they are not treating a certain illness that is not their specific specialty.
In conclusion, when a patient is trying to determine the doctor who would treat them and whom they will put their high expectation of recovery on, they should be able to make the decision with all possible information they could use. Providing the doctors records of treatment with their previous patients of similar illness will not only help the patients in creating a rational decision but also be beneficial for the doctors themselves.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 582, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'doctors'' or 'doctor's'?
Suggestion: doctors'; doctor's
...illness to help them determine both the doctors competency and also their own expectati...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 327, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...implausible for them to be an expert in all of the various diseases or health conditions t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 627, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
... not exactly the paragon of their kinds.The problem is that in the status quo most ...
^^^
Line 3, column 757, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...not really good at. Society could easily get informations on what certain well-kn...
^^
Line 5, column 135, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...easily through their records and decide whether or not they want the doctor to treat them with...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 149, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'these informations'?
Suggestion: this information; these informations
...cy of previous patients are of concern, these information could easily be removed from the record...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 656, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...previous records in the very first place . The doctor would also not going to be s...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'nonetheless', 'really', 'regarding', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'well', 'while', 'for instance', 'in conclusion', 'in particular', 'it is true', 'in the first place', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.21986970684 0.240241500013 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.153094462541 0.157235817809 97% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0830618892508 0.0880659088768 94% => OK
Adverbs: 0.057003257329 0.0497285424764 115% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0765472312704 0.0444667217837 172% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.13680781759 0.12292977631 111% => OK
Participles: 0.0325732899023 0.0406280797675 80% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.64700228359 2.79330140395 95% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0276872964169 0.030933414821 90% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.104234527687 0.0997080785238 105% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0374592833876 0.0249443105267 150% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0179153094463 0.0148568991511 121% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3491.0 2732.02544248 128% => OK
No of words: 578.0 452.878318584 128% => OK
Chars per words: 6.03979238754 6.0361032391 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.90322654589 4.58838876751 107% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.373702422145 0.366273622748 102% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.292387543253 0.280924506359 104% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.174740484429 0.200843997647 87% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0951557093426 0.132149295362 72% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64700228359 2.79330140395 95% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 219.290929204 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.373702422145 0.48968727796 76% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 44.1930199667 55.4138127331 80% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6194690265 97% => OK
Sentence length: 28.9 23.380412469 124% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.5251669208 59.4972553346 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 174.55 141.124799967 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.9 23.380412469 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.0 0.674092028746 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.21349557522 134% => OK
Readability: 58.1387543253 51.4728631049 113% => OK
Elegance: 1.35795454545 1.64882698954 82% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.313546605188 0.391690518653 80% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.180474701611 0.123202303941 146% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0853675673432 0.077325440228 110% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.593295313997 0.547984918172 108% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.118907089599 0.149214159877 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.146414492058 0.161403998019 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0538107537089 0.0892212321368 60% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.437988577465 0.385218514788 114% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.104213400803 0.0692045440612 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234141761297 0.275328986314 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0305572253836 0.0653680567796 47% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.4325221239 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.30420353982 132% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88274336283 61% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 3.66592920354 164% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.70907079646 111% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 13.5995575221 125% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.