The following appeared in the memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.
“In a controlled loboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacteria than did the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals During our recent test of regular-strength Ultra clean ith doctors, nurses, and visitors at our hospital in Worktown, the hospital reported significantly lower cases of patient infection (20 percent reduction) than did any other hospitals in our group. Therefore to prevent serious patient infections, we should supply ultraClean at all hand-ashing stations, including those used by visitors, throughout our hospital system.”
The passage provides a glint of the patient infection scenario, and the final stand taken by the director with the available evidences. However, the data may not be sufficient to make a proper conclusion about the situation.
First and foremost, the Lab study has been done only for a concentrated version of the UltraClean. A better ay to study the effectiveness would have been to use the same concentration UltraClean in the Workton hospital, so that we could obtain a correlation between the percentage reduction in harmful bacteria and the reduction of patient infection achieved.
Secondly, there is no data about the concentration level of the concentrated UltraClean used in the initial study and the regular-strength UltraClean used in Worktown hospital. Hence, it is not possible to say with absolute certainity, whether soap concentration has any effect on the reduction of harmful bacteria. This also means that we can not come to a conclusion about what concentration level of soap would be optimum for use in the hospitals.
Thirdly, There is no evidence to suggest that reduction in harmful bacteria can reduce the number of patient infections
Also, We don not have suffiecient evidence to suggest that the reduction in patient infection achieved in Worktown is only due to the UltraClean soap used. Correlation does not necessarily mean Causation. It could have been due to other causes, such as having less percentage of contagious infections in that period of study, or better isolation of patients to prevent infection etc.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-24 | PATRICK WINSTON A | 50 | view |
- The following appeared in the memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.“In a controlled loboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful 50
- Consider a situation where you are asked by your supervisor to work with one of your co-workers on a project. This co-worker has opinions that are very different than yours and they feel very strongly about these opinions. Do you think this is a good idea 73
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people’s efficiency so that they have more leisure time. 58
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 11 15
No. of Words: 249 350
No. of Characters: 1270 1500
No. of Different Words: 126 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.972 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.1 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.028 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 89 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 79 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 60 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.636 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.531 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.818 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.378 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.673 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.125 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 67, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nce to suggest that reduction in harmful bacteria can reduce the number of patien...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, however, may, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 28.8173652695 38% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1318.0 2260.96107784 58% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 249.0 441.139720559 56% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29317269076 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.56307096286 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10039640427 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 126.0 204.123752495 62% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.506024096386 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 410.4 705.55239521 58% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 19.7664670659 51% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.4034581271 57.8364921388 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.8 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.9 5.70786347227 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.149898654456 0.218282227539 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0618772588206 0.0743258471296 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0487744881874 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0820346189023 0.128457276422 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0565090804989 0.0628817314937 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 98.500998004 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.