Does video communication with doctor help patients to cure any disease? Pros & Cons?
Recently, the phenomenon of video communications with a doctor to cure diseases and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that using video communications for treatment can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, treating patients by video communications can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the demerits of crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. thus, beneficial ramifications of both this common phenomenon and accordingly complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, use of new communication technologies by doctors might increase the consequences of critical needs. moreover, fundamental aspects of incurable illnesses could relate to this reality that the demerits of simple medical treatments pertain to medical practitioners. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of this remarkable phenomenon.
to conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of giving help to patients by video communication far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues' potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 381, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
...ment which discovered current policies. thus, beneficial ramifications of both this ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 137, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Moreover
...ase the consequences of critical needs. moreover, fundamental aspects of N9 could relate...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: To
...tion of this remarkable phenomenon. to conclude, while there are several compe...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1571.0 1207.87684729 130% => OK
No of words: 276.0 242.827586207 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69202898551 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34323317232 2.71678728327 123% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 139.433497537 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.655797101449 0.580463131201 113% => OK
syllable_count: 504.0 379.143842365 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.9038815908 50.4703680194 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.916666667 104.977214359 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 20.9669160288 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.25397266985 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.33497536946 56% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192849298828 0.242375264174 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627016291228 0.0925447433944 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0851034861442 0.071462118173 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108374147729 0.151781067708 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0476389054306 0.0609392437508 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 12.6369458128 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.02 11.5310837438 139% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.01 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.