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 arrticle and the lecture discuss the advantages of patient's electronical medical recored system in U.S. rather than pervious paper system. While the reading passage enumerate three valuble pluses for this system, the lecturer refutes these benefits and argues each of the author's reason.
First, the lecture claims that electronic record reduces the cost of keeping the health ealated documents of patients. It asserts that instead of the huge space which paper records need to store, electronic records do not need any except virtually. The professor refutes this idea by adding this notion that almost all doctors who adopted the new electronic system, they keep the paper record system too especially for emergency situations. He believes that it won't decrease the cost of coping or transfering too.
Second, the article atates that prenenting errors is another important benefits of the new electroninc record system, since doctors will use the standard eligilble font of computer instead of handwriting method. In the other hand, the professor contends this idea by explainng that doctors are using pen and paper while examining of patiants and writing prescription. Their assistance will fill the electronic records then. He infers that in this situation electronic resord system does not guaraantee the error free recordig approach.
Third, the reading passage avers that the new electronic system is a big help for medical research; it provides a large amount of numerous patient's data which can't be gathered in the paper record system such easily. Conversly, the lecturer refutes this and says that medical resarch won't benefits neseccessarily because in the U.S. privacy law protect the patienty's information to share with third parties easily. Researcher should follow the strict law and get the permission of several organization and patients.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nd argues each of the authors reason. First, the lecture claims that electroni...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 289, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ally. The professor refutes this idea by adding this notion that almost all docto...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he cost of coping or transfering too. Second, the article atates that prenenti...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tee the error free recordig approach. Third, the reading passage avers that th...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 145, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'patients'' or 'patient's'?
Suggestion: patients'; patient's
... it provides a large amount of numerous patients data which cant be gathered in the pape...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 165, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... amount of numerous patients data which cant be gathered in the paper record system ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 486, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun organization seems to be countable; consider using: 'several organizations'.
Suggestion: several organizations
...he strict law and get the permission of several organization and patients.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, second, so, then, third, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1578.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44137931034 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59354361635 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 145.348785872 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586206896552 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 481.5 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.4452060605 49.2860985944 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.384615385 110.228320801 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3076923077 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.84615384615 7.06452816374 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.274259077198 0.272083759551 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0899244201646 0.0996497079465 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0698383704204 0.0662205650399 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158223494622 0.162205337803 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0359199469398 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.2367328918 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.