An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor's record of treating similar afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether doctor is competent to treat that medical condition
The issue of whether the ailing patient should have access to his or her doctor's record is a contentious one. Though both sides have their strengths and weaknesses, I believe even by seeing the doctor's past record the patient cannot determine whether doctor will be successful in treating the medical condition.
Firstly, even if the patient has seen all the doctors records but still the treatment was not succesful, maybe because the doctor may have prescribed proper medicine but the nurse may have made a mistake and may have given the wrong medicine. A doctor is also a human being, he can make mistakes, if during operation the doctor's concentration dwindled and he made some erroneous mistake which led to the failure of the operation, in such situation access to past records would'nt help in determining doctor's capabilities.
Secondly, every patient might have a different medical condition. For example, If a patient is suffering from diabetes and he even has asthama problem and the patient sees the doctor's records of curing similar patients who had diabetes but those patients didnt have asthama problem, would be of no use. The reason being the patient's medical condition is different from the patients whom he is reviewing as he even has asthama so the doctor might have a different treatment for him or her.
To add to this, if we consider a situation that the doctor was practising in a hospital say "A",but recently he has shifted to another hospital say "B". His records are all good in hospital "A". Maybe because the facilities are good in the hospital, also the staff who is assisting the doctor is good.
But without having information of hospital "B", How would the patient determine whether the doctor would be able to treat his medical condition successfully in hospital "B"? So these factors are also important while determing whether the doctor is competent enough.
Nevertheless, seeing the doctor's records might give some hope to the patient that his medical condition can be cured. The human have the tendency that they believe hat others say easily, so if they get good reviews about a particular doctor they feel the doctor is capable of treating their medical condition as well.
In conclusion, the patient should not entirely depend upon the doctor's records of treating similar patients but should also see other factors like his or her own medical conditon, hospital amenities and staff etc. For these reasons the patient even though having access to the doctor's records, cannot determine doctor's competency merely through the records.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-08-23 | dimplepatel16 | 50 | view |
- Claim: An action is morally correct if the amount of good that results from the action is greater than the amount of bad that results from the action.Reason: When assessing the morality of an action, the results of the action are more important than the i 70
- An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor's record of treating similar afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether doctor is competent to treat that medical condition 50
- The following appeared in a newsletter offering advice to investors:"Tech corporation is our pick for investment this term. We urge all of our clients to invest in this new company, For the first time in ten years, a company that has developed satellite t 50
- The following opinion was provided in a letter to the editor of a national aeronautics magazine:“Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great 70
- The following appeared as part of a petition sent to residents of Youngtown by an environmental protection group:"The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is esse 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 263, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ent cannot determine whether doctor will be successful in treating the medical co...
^^
Line 3, column 322, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'doctors'' or 'doctor's'?
Suggestion: doctors'; doctor's
... make mistakes, if during operation the doctors concentration dwindled and he made some...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 472, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...n such situation access to past records wouldnt help in determining doctors capabilitie...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 256, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...nts who had diabetes but those patients didnt have asthama problem, would be of no us...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 106, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , but
...actising in a hospital say 'A',but recently he has shifted to another hosp...
^^^^
Line 12, column 294, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...gh having access to the doctors records, cannot determine doctors competency mere...
^^
Line 12, column 346, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ermine doctors competency merely through the records.
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'may', 'nevertheless', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'still', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'in conclusion']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.239350912779 0.240241500013 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.170385395538 0.157235817809 108% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0669371196755 0.0880659088768 76% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0547667342799 0.0497285424764 110% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0446247464503 0.0444667217837 100% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0993914807302 0.12292977631 81% => OK
Participles: 0.052738336714 0.0406280797675 130% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.76019208004 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0182555780933 0.030933414821 59% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.119675456389 0.0997080785238 120% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0344827586207 0.0249443105267 138% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0101419878296 0.0148568991511 68% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2637.0 2732.02544248 97% => OK
No of words: 426.0 452.878318584 94% => OK
Chars per words: 6.19014084507 6.0361032391 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.58838876751 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.417840375587 0.366273622748 114% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.333333333333 0.280924506359 119% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.18779342723 0.200843997647 94% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.12441314554 0.132149295362 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76019208004 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 219.290929204 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.448356807512 0.48968727796 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 48.6610370138 55.4138127331 88% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6194690265 78% => OK
Sentence length: 26.625 23.380412469 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.8476278961 59.4972553346 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.8125 141.124799967 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.625 23.380412469 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.9375 0.674092028746 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 4.94800884956 141% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.21349557522 134% => OK
Readability: 59.9583333333 51.4728631049 116% => OK
Elegance: 1.45112781955 1.64882698954 88% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.432615356094 0.391690518653 110% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.151958179391 0.123202303941 123% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.118166936775 0.077325440228 153% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.681294894575 0.547984918172 124% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.137528343397 0.149214159877 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.189081871413 0.161403998019 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0812711524163 0.0892212321368 91% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.330629197802 0.385218514788 86% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.104312594693 0.0692045440612 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.264544911417 0.275328986314 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0698361574672 0.0653680567796 107% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.4325221239 77% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.30420353982 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88274336283 82% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 7.22455752212 97% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 3.66592920354 82% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.70907079646 74% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 13.5995575221 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.