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 claims that recording patient's data electronic in computers has some benefits rather than keeping them in paper format.However, the lecturer finds all the ideas dubious and presents some evidence to refute them all and prove that advantages are uncertain for this form of storing the information.
The author argues that this method will help to reduce cost and save money in using memory of computers instead of papers for keeping data and even we need less space and we can access any information about illnesses and patients easily.Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that doctors should keep their data on paper to have a backup from them for urgent times so it would not have effects on decreasing use of paper and their diagnostics are attribute to their information that have written before.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that use of medical records by electronic tools will decrease human errors.On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that maintaining information about sicks person will not eliminate human errors because it is imperative for doctors to take note about their patients and their mood and medicine that they consume so they have them in their office to use later and if they have poor hand writing .Indeed human mistakes are inevitable in medical scientists.
Finally, the reading asserts that researchers will have an information bank for their searches that have been collected by doctors so they are comfortable to have electronic record data rather than papers in offices.In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that information of people are secure on doctors so they will block them and do not let every body to check them and keep them in a private location and for researching by universities students should have permitted letter to allow them to see so this way of recording data will not necessarily improve searching levels.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 132, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...ather than keeping them in paper format.However, the lecturer finds all the ideas dubio...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 238, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Conversely
...ion about illnesses and patients easily.Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that d...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 123, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: On
...tronic tools will decrease human errors.On the contrary, the professor underlines ...
^^
Line 4, column 452, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...later and if they have poor hand writing .Indeed human mistakes are inevitable in ...
^^
Line 4, column 454, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Indeed
...ter and if they have poor hand writing .Indeed human mistakes are inevitable in medica...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 454, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Indeed,
...ter and if they have poor hand writing .Indeed human mistakes are inevitable in medica...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 216, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: In
...cord data rather than papers in offices.In contrast, the speaker dismisses this is...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, furthermore, however, if, so, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 22.412803532 174% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1621.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 318.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09748427673 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70646586491 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522012578616 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 511.2 419.366225166 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 4.0 13.0662251656 31% => 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: 79.0 21.2450331126 372% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 106.499706572 49.2860985944 216% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 405.25 110.228320801 368% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 79.5 21.698381199 366% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 21.0 7.06452816374 297% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.207773852602 0.272083759551 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131697651274 0.0996497079465 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0248610609748 0.0662205650399 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131697651274 0.162205337803 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0248610609748 0.0443174109184 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 42.3 13.3589403974 317% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -8.71 53.8541721854 -16% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 15.9 5.55761589404 286% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 34.1 11.0289183223 309% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 13.48 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.33 8.42419426049 134% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 28.5 10.7273730684 266% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 33.6 10.498013245 320% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 34.0 11.2008830022 304% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.