TPO 47 - Integrated Writing Task
In this set materials, the reading passage state that the electronic medical records have several advantageous points such as reducing costs, preventing error, and aiding research. On the other hand, the listening section brings into question the reading points by providing different reasons(and examples).
First of all, the reading passage indicates that electronic medical records reduce the cost of saving and transferring data. In contrast, the lecturer opposes this view by mentioning that doctors need to save the previous paper-based data for an emergency situation. Also, they must pay money for saving electronic medical record alongside saving the paper base data. Therefore, they must pay a huge cost for this purpose.
Second, the reading argues that electronic medical records eliminate error step from poor handwriting; conversely, what the speaker believes is different. She points that doctors still use pencil and paper when they want to examination their patient. Also, they use stuff for changing paper base data to electronic data; thus, the doctor does not write data from an electronic device. Hence, the stuff would make a mistake, when he or she wants to load patient's electronic data.
Finally, according to the reading, the electronic medical records can help the doctor and researchers to access the patient data easily. However, the professor claims that saving the patient's data need to allow strike role in the USA, and they must obey the law. Also, doctors must get permission from the patient when they want to use their data. In addition, most patients have blocked medical data for any uses
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 184, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'patients'' or 'patient's'?
Suggestion: patients'; patient's
...r, the professor claims that saving the patients data need to allow strike role in the U...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, finally, first, hence, however, if, second, so, still, therefore, thus, in addition, in contrast, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 10.4613686534 10% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1380.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 258.0 270.72406181 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3488372093 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51258475409 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550387596899 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 418.5 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.5300657041 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.5714285714 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4285714286 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.1428571429 7.06452816374 158% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0769160701929 0.272083759551 28% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0353167059657 0.0996497079465 35% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0194149110365 0.0662205650399 29% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0530728962252 0.162205337803 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00803342181819 0.0443174109184 18% => 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: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.