An ailing patient should have access to his or her doctor's record of treating similarly afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your opinion.
Physicians deal with human lives, and so require a series of training, internships and residencies in order to be licensed to practice. This makes them competent and confident in their ability to successfully treat patients. Therefore, all patients should have a certain level of trust and confidence in the abilities of their physician without requiring access to the records of previous patients.
Firstly, human beings are different, therefore, therapeutic outcomes will differ. Hence, one cannot use the outcome of one treatment to determine the outcome of another. Therefore, this is not a reliable method of assessing the competence of a doctor. For instance, two patients with similar diagnosis, being treated by the same doctor using identical treatment methods may have different prognoses. This can be due to a number of reasons, chief of which is the immune system of each patient. Therefore, saying that a patient should have access to the treatment record of another patient to ascertain the level of competence of the doctor is wrong.
Moreover, every patient has a right of confidentiality, and so, it is illegal to disclose any kind of information about a patient to another individual. The patient could sue the doctors and every other person involved if it is discovered that there was a breach of confidentiality. One might argue that the patient will have access to only the treatment plan and outcome of treatment. If this is true, then the patient should be satisfied with hearing it from the doctor, and does not have to see the patient’s record.
On one hand, having access to these records may help build a level of trust and confidence in the doctor. However, if a patient already lacks trust in the physician, no amount of proof or evidence will make the patient regain trust. Doctors undergo rigorous training before they can practice, and they would not be given a license to practice if they have not proven to the medical board that they are competent and capable. In essence, patients should always trust that the physician is knowledgeable and would always provide the necessary treatment modalities for any illness.
In conclusion, it is unwarranted and uncalled for, for a patient to be granted access to another individual’s treatment record for the purpose of alleviating the fears of the patient and establishing the competence of the physician.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-07 | Saket Choudhary | 50 | view |
| 2023-06-29 | Technoblade | 66 | view |
| 2023-02-15 | shalin63 | 50 | view |
| 2023-01-15 | Jorobe8 | 50 | view |
| 2022-11-19 | Swarnali Swarno | 58 | view |
- An ailing patient should have access to his or her doctor s record of treating similarly afflicted patients Through gaining such access the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition Write a respons 50
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations we cannot permit i 50
- All too often companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently if companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees such consultants would be unnecessary Write a response in which you discuss 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, for instance, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2003.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 391.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12276214834 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89381866376 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.496163682864 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 620.1 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.5589039714 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.277777778 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7222222222 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.351887181414 0.243740707755 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123370016734 0.0831039109588 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0852229083818 0.0758088955206 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208993054743 0.150359130593 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0587962711294 0.0667264976115 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 100.480337079 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.