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 have several advantages over traditional paper-based record keeping.
The reading states that electronic medical record system has some advantages over the traditional paper ones and presents three reasons. However, the professor states that these benefits are actually very uncertain. She refutes each of the reasons.
First, the reading claims that the new electronic system will reduce storage and transfer costs. The speaker says that the cost-saving of new system is unlikely to be significant since doctors still keep the papers for emergency backups. Hence, there will not be a great deal of cost-saving allocated to paper storage.
Second, the article states that the new recording system will prevent handwriting and paper organization problems and errors. The lecturer contends that the doctors will still use pen and papers since they write their prescriptions and examinations by hand. Therefore, poor handwriting problem will not be solved because the staff will have to interpret the doctors' handwritings while entering them in the computers.
Third, the article contends that researchers will have more convenient access to patients’ data to do their research. However, the professor claims that it will be still difficult for them to access all patients' information since there are strict privacy laws. She adds that many patients can keep their information private if they wish to. Therefore, researchers have to obtain many permissions to access required data and in a lot of cases, the permissions will not be granted due to the aforementioned reason.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 209, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'patients'' or 'patient's'?
Suggestion: patients'; patient's
... still difficult for them to access all patients information since there are strict priv...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 519, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...anted due to the aforementioned reason.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, hence, however, if, second, so, still, therefore, third, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1280.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 235.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44680851064 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81197722872 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548936170213 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 380.7 419.366225166 91% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.5428748982 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.4615384615 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0769230769 21.698381199 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.07692307692 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.1669506333 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0615061375622 0.0996497079465 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0549021418278 0.0662205650399 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100659224415 0.162205337803 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0327578979054 0.0443174109184 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.03 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.