Both the reading passage and lecture discuss about electronic system to store medical record in electronic databases rather that on paper. The author presents some benefits of digital record system over traditional paper-based record keeping. However, the professor challenges author's points by providing several counter arguments.
To begin with, the author posits that using electronic record would reduce expenses as it would decrease costs associated with storage and exchanges of medical data. On contrast, the speaker points out the fact that the reduction of cost would be insignificant, as most of the doctors would like to keep paper records that contains signature of patients considering legal issues. Thus, storage cost and consequently total cost would remain same.
Secondly, according to the passage, possibility of human mistakes would be minimized by using electronic record procedure. The author brings up the idea of using standardized forms and legible fonts to prevent unintentional errors. On the other hand, the professor argues that as doctors will continue to use pen and paper while taking notes or writing prescriptions for patients, and it needs to be interpreted by staffs to make electronic records, chance of errors due to poor handwriting would not be diminished.
Finally, the author asserts that electronic medical record would be beneficial for medical research as it makes easy access of thousands of patients' health data. The lecturer refutes this point and mentions that it would be tough to follow strict and complicated rules to access people's medical record without his/her concern. The professor also points out to the patients' right to block usage of medical data for any purpose if it is not relevant to their own health.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 450, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ed by staffs to make electronic records, chance of errors due to poor handwriting...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, while, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1498.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 277.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40794223827 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70723944895 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584837545126 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 458.1 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.5140100624 49.2860985944 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.833333333 110.228320801 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0833333333 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.08333333333 7.06452816374 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.528195090633 0.272083759551 194% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.195268156491 0.0996497079465 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.124933246429 0.0662205650399 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.321884503608 0.162205337803 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.06506718299 0.0443174109184 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.3589403974 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.