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.
Both the lecture and the passage talk about merits and demerits of electronic medical record. The reading introduces three advantages of electronic medical record. But, the lecture skeptics on these benefits.
First, The writer believes that electronic version can elimitate the costs of copying, storing, and fixing of handwriting records. But, the lecturer cast doubts on it. She asserts that doctor have backup from hand-based recording for specific condition like sergory. So, the costs are remains yet.
Second, the author declares that electronic midcal records reduce the error due to poor handwriting or inapropriate transcription of data. On the other hand, the professor says a point that the doctors don't input datas to coputer directly. First, they write the records on paper and then, the office staffs read data from paper and submit data. Thus, the errors would not decreas.
Finally, the reading thinks that electronic version can ease the procces of accessing to records that can help to prepare a facilitate to research. In cortasts, the lecturer believes that the proccess remote after existing of electronic version because the researcher should give a specific permission to access them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 203, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...professor says a point that the doctors dont input datas to coputer directly. First,...
^^^^
Line 7, column 90, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'record'.
Suggestion: record
...on can ease the procces of accessing to records that can help to prepare a facilitate t...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 123, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ing to records that can help to prepare a facilitate to research. In cortasts, the lecturer ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, second, so, then, thus, as to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 10.4613686534 10% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1029.0 1373.03311258 75% => OK
No of words: 189.0 270.72406181 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44444444444 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70779275107 4.04702891845 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.576420786 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 145.348785872 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.624338624339 0.540411800872 116% => OK
syllable_count: 309.6 419.366225166 74% => 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: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.5665515246 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.1538461538 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.5384615385 21.698381199 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61538461538 7.06452816374 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.169625675965 0.272083759551 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0582992591292 0.0996497079465 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678714146389 0.0662205650399 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104749757062 0.162205337803 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0676952740732 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.68 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.