n the United States, medical information about patients traditionally has been recorded and stored on paper forms. However, there are efforts to persuade doctors to adopt electronic medical record systems in which information about patients is stored in electronic databases rather than on paper. It is argued that storing patients’ medical records in electronic databases has several advantages over traditional paper-based record keeping.
Reducing Costs
First, the use of electronic records can help reduce costs by saving money on storing and transferring medical records. While paper records require a significant amount of storage space, electronic medical records take up virtually no space. Moreover, by having patients’ records computerized in databases, doctors can easily access the records from almost anywhere and can easily duplicate and transfer them when necessary. This costs much less than copying, faxing, or transporting paper records from one location to another.
Preventing Errors
Second, electronic medical records are crucial to reducing the chances of medical errors. Illegible handwriting, improper transcription of data, and nonstandard organization of paper records have caused errors that in some cases have had serious consequences for the patients’ health. In contrast, electronic records are associated with standardization of forms and legible computer fonts and thus minimize the possibility of human error.
Aiding Research
Third, electronic medical records can greatly aid medical research by making it possible to gather large amounts of data from patient records. It is often impractical, impossible, or prohibitively expensive to manually go through thousands of patients’ paper records housed in doctors’ offices. However, with the existence of electronic medical records, it would be simple to draw out the needed information from the medical databases because the databases are already formatted for data collection. Once in the electronic system, the records could be accessed from any research location.
The reading passage argues that there are several advantages of documentation of patients' medical history in the electronic database: Reduction of Cost, Prevention of Errors and Aids in research activities. However, the lecturer refutes each of the authors' reasons.
To begin with, the speaker claims that it is uncertain about the reduction of cost after using this practice. Those doctors who used electronic database used paper for the backup purpose, which contains the signature of a doctor, and required for the legal purpose. Thus, finally there requires an additional cost for the storage of paper too.
Also, the Professor argues that there would not be any chance of minimization of error due to the poor handwriting and transcription of the data. The doctors have to write the prescription to the patients, and there might be chances error. Moreover, there might be a problem during the interpretation of the doctors' statement by the staff.
Finally, the speaker says that the database was difficult to use and not easily accessible. The reports are subjective to privacy and it required strict law in the US if wished by the doctors to collect it. Additionally, it is a complex procedure, and often not granted. According to the lecturer, the majority of the patient's blocks their history for use.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 308, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'doctors'' or 'doctor's'?
Suggestion: doctors'; doctor's
...roblem during the interpretation of the doctors statement by the staff. Finally, the s...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, if, moreover, so, thus, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1099.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 214.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13551401869 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83051466324 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 145.348785872 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.584112149533 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 348.3 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.6498428315 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.5833333333 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8333333333 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.08333333333 7.06452816374 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.112958876584 0.272083759551 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0337797450397 0.0996497079465 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0334679181552 0.0662205650399 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0619888881943 0.162205337803 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.029154533049 0.0443174109184 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.