In 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 states three theories that electronic savings have more vantages related to paper records; whereas, the lecture points out that these hypotheses are not all true and electronic records are actually very uncertain and unreliable.
Firstly, the author insists that electronic records help to save mony by saving money on the reduction of storing and transferring the medical records as paper. The professor, however, argues that by shifting to electronic form there would not be any money saving; because doctors will still keep the paper records as a backup. As a result, if MD's even adopt to the new saving aproach, they will still keep the paper records so it will increase their job to deal with both, and also wil increase theie expenditures.
Secondly, the topic says that electronic records decrease the errors especially the human errors. In contrast, the speaker reckons that most doctors still use pen and paper to write down while they are examining pationts. Furthermore, she mentions that the human errors would not be reduced, because to converting the writen records to electronic forms, staffs have to do it and they still must interpret what has been written down on that peace of paper.
Lastly, the writer deems that by doing this, the records can be use in surveys. ON the contrary, the lecturer invalidates this by saying that it is difficult to use this record in servays, because they need permision from both doctors and pations. And even after that such permishions are not granted.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 353, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ds as a backup. As a result, if MDs even adopt to the new saving aproach, they wi...
^^
Line 3, column 355, Rule ID: ADOPT_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'adapt to'?
Suggestion: adapt to
... as a backup. As a result, if MDs even adopt to the new saving aproach, they will still...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, whereas, while, in contrast, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => 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: 1279.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 253.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.05533596838 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98822939669 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49655983524 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581027667984 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 383.4 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.4569268157 49.2860985944 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.9 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.3 21.698381199 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 15.2 7.06452816374 215% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.2168757682 0.272083759551 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0850099069324 0.0996497079465 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0576610030439 0.0662205650399 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119193481832 0.162205337803 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524691557093 0.0443174109184 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27 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.