electronic medical records
The passage provides possible advantages of employing electronic medical record systems by doctors. The lecturer disregards the points made in the article, and she claims they cannot be referred to as reliable benefits. Her further demonstrations are as follows.
Firstly, opposite to what the passage claims, the electronic medical record systems will not result in the decline of storing costs. Even doctors that utilize the electronic systems will most likely keep and countinue using paper versions as well, as a backup in case of an emergency or documentation for legal reasons. Hence, no beneficial cost reduction due to the implementation of electronic systems can be expected.
Secondly, application of electronic medical records does not reduce the possibility of human error due to illegible handwriting or faulty transcription of data despite the speculation presented in the text. Doctors still use a pen and a piece of paper to jot down data on a patient and write prescriptions, even in offices using electorincdata storing systems. It is usually the responsibility of a staff member to enter these data into the electronic system, and therefore, the occurance of an error in the process of interpretation of medical data is still likely.
Finally, despite the views communicated in the passage, accessing medial records can be a great challenge to researchers even in the case of using electronic systems. There are very strict regulations regarding the availability of medical data to reseachers due to the privacy law in the United States. Subsequently, a scholar would have to go through complex and strict processes to access medical records even if they are restored electronically.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-02 | Vivian Chang | 80 | view |
| 2023-07-02 | YasamanEsml | 80 | view |
| 2022-12-14 | shekoo20 | 80 | view |
| 2022-12-07 | HSNDEK | 73 | view |
| 2022-10-10 | mraru | 83 | view |
- teachers are more appreciated today or in the past 81
- TPO 12 independent focusing on one thing is better than knowing basic things about diverse majors 90
- The article asserts that working in a four day workweek setting is extremely beneficial for both companies and employees However the lecturer completely disagrees with this idea and rejects all three reasons mentioned in the passage His opposite explanati 80
- TPO 18 integrated agree or not students are more influenced by their teachers than by their friends 73
- extinction of sea cows 75
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, hence, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 12.0772626932 8% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 22.412803532 31% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1444.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 268.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38805970149 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17077248842 2.5805825403 123% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.570895522388 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6222411647 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.333333333 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3333333333 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 7.06452816374 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.408472018445 0.272083759551 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151958666298 0.0996497079465 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.133680181014 0.0662205650399 202% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.259164452551 0.162205337803 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0195682112475 0.0443174109184 44% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.8541721854 60% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.68 8.42419426049 115% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 63.6247240618 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.