Does video communication with doctor help patients to cure any disease? Pros & Cons?s
Recently, the phenomenon of the video communication for treatment and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of the video remedy is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined that the study of video treatment can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, treating patient by video communication provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of remote surgery, as well as the distance cure are inextricably bound up, according to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the influence of video communication on treatment of virtual treatment. Thus beneficial ramifications of both treating the chronic disease and psychological consultation apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science remedy, helping the patients by video communication might increase the consequences of medical treatment. Moreover, fundamental aspects of the laser surgery could relate to this reality that the demerits of being risky treatment pertain to N. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of the virtual remedy is correlated negatively to lack of physical treatment. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of online treatment.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of the video communication for treatment far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of the distance treatment prove the significance of those patients who live in remote area, but also pinpoint practical implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 421, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...tion on treatment of virtual treatment. Thus beneficial ramifications of both treati...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, 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 : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 5.75862068966 399% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1583.0 1207.87684729 131% => OK
No of words: 283.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.59363957597 5.00649968141 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25598002695 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 139.433497537 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60777385159 0.580463131201 105% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 379.143842365 132% => 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: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 86.7611902421 50.4703680194 172% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.909090909 104.977214359 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7272727273 20.9669160288 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.25397266985 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.169343596509 0.242375264174 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0592056696586 0.0925447433944 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059313798414 0.071462118173 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100371708569 0.151781067708 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0359501627836 0.0609392437508 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 12.6369458128 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 53.1260098522 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.44 11.5310837438 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.62 8.32886699507 128% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 55.0591133005 187% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => 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.