阅读材料
The benefits claimed for electronic medical records are actually every uncertain.
First, the costs savings are unlikely be as significant as the reading suggests. For example, there probably won't be any savings related to record storage. You see, doctors who adopt electronic records usually don't throw out or discontinue the paper records. They keep the paper records as an emergency backup or because the paper originals with signatures are needed for legal reasons. So as a result, most doctors who adopt electronic record keeping still have to pay storage costs associated with paper-based record keeping.
Second, electronic medical records cannot eliminate the possibility of errors caused by poor handwriting or by mistakes in the transcription of data. That's because most doctors, including those who've adopted electronic medical record keeping, still use pen and paper while examining patients. They take notes and write prescriptions by hand. It's usually the office staff of a doctor who entered this information at a later time from the handwritten documents into electronic systems. So poor handwriting can still lead to errors in the records since the staff members have to interpret what the doctor has written.
Third, medical research would not necessarily benefit from electronic record keeping. Researchers will still find it difficult to access and use medical information. That's because access to all medical information is subject to strict privacy laws in the United States. Privacy laws exist to allow patients to keep their medical information private if they wish to. As a consequence, researchers who want to collect data from electronic medical records have to follow strict and complicated procedures and obtain many permissions along the way, including permissions from the patients. And often, such permissions are not granted. For example, patients can block the use of their medical records for any purpose other than their own medical treatment.
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific points made in the reading passage.
In the lecture, the professor casts doubt on the reading passage’s idea that storing patients’ medical records in electronic databases has several advantages over traditional paper-based record keeping. The professor asserts that the benefits are actually uncertain. To begin with, according to the reading passage, electronic medical records will reduce costs of storing and transferring. The professor argues that the cost savings are unlikely as the reading suggests. He says that the doctors just keep the paper records as an emergency backup and most doctors who adopt electronic record keeping still have to pay storage costs associated with paper-based record keeping. On top of that, the reading passage claims that the use of electronic medical records will help reduce the chances of medical errors. On the contrary, the professor rebuts that the electronic records cannot eliminate the possibility of errors. She says that doctors still use pen and paper while examining patients. It is usually the office staff of a doctor who will enter the information at a later time from the handwritten documents into electronic systems. So poor handwriting can still lead to errors. Lastly, the professor rebuts the reading’s point that electronic medical records will be beneficial to medical research through obtaining a great amount of data from patient records by stating that medical research would not necessarily benefit from electronic record keeping. The professor points out that access to all medical information is subject to strict privacy laws in the United States. Researchers who want to collect data from electronic medical records have to follow strict and complicated procedures and obtain many permissions including patient permissions along the way. Often such permissions are not granted.
留言区中有很多我们对问题的解答喔， 登录后可以查看
还没有账号？马上 注册 >>