Reading and lecture are both about the efficiency of electronic medical record systems in US. On the one hand, the writer states that the systems bring numerous advantages. On the other hand, the lecturer casts doubts on the claims made by the writer, saying that his arguments are not certain when compared to real facts.
First, it is highly unlikely that costs would be reduced by this systems. This is because doctors will still use paper as a back-up for their activity, in order to be used in legal activities. As a consequence, these papers are still stored in large spaces, so the same amount of money is going to be spend. Thus, this argument gainsays the author's point of view.
Second, this system does not eliminates errors. The author asserts that illegible handwriting and improper transcription of data can be solved by this way. However, the speaker refutes this, arguing that doctors have to use paper in order to take notes and write prescriptions. Moreover, they are not those who are in charge with introducing data in the system, but the other members of the staff. In other words, when copying data, staff can wrongly interpret handwriting, and thereby mistakes will be made. This is a strong standpoint against the passage.
Third, medical research will face difficulties in accessing online data. The writer pretends that doctors all over the America, will have the opportunity to access medical information from other parts of the country. Anyway, this statement is strongly contradicted by the speaker, who specify that medical records are private. This means that there are strict and complex procedures for receiving access to medical information. Furthermore, the patients themselves, must give their agreement for their personal medical records to be analyzed by researchers, and the experience proved that they often refuse to do this. In conclusion, the writer and the speaker seem to be in disagreement regarding this particular topic.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 61, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...unlikely that costs would be reduced by this systems. This is because doctors will s...
^^^^
Line 5, column 30, Rule ID: DOES_X_HAS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'eliminate'? As 'do' is already inflected, the verb cannot also be inflected.
Suggestion: eliminate
...f view. Second, this system does not eliminates errors. The author asserts that illegib...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 30, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'eliminate'
Suggestion: eliminate
...f view. Second, this system does not eliminates errors. The author asserts that illegib...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
anyway, but, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, regarding, second, so, still, third, thus, in conclusion, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1657.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 321.0 270.72406181 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16199376947 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68317451378 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591900311526 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 505.8 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.0719087186 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.2105263158 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8947368421 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.73684210526 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.328504616305 0.272083759551 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0874099747441 0.0996497079465 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0716204856244 0.0662205650399 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.169418717915 0.162205337803 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0632193233798 0.0443174109184 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.1 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 63.6247240618 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.