NCEP Report

After reading the NCEP report, “Implications of Recent Clinical Trials”, I determined that it does not exemplifies the qualities of good technical writing. Unfortunately, the report does not fulfill some of the basic characteristics for good technical writing such as clear, concise, consistency, correctness, accuracy, usability, and readability.
One of the reason is because of its readability. Since this report was submitted for a broad audience; people that would be reading this report are diverse. They come from different races, ethnicity, gender, professions and ages. The report uses special words that are specific to a medical profession that some people in a broad audience would not understand. For example, in the report the authors use the words such as fibrate and nicotinic acid to be combined with LDL-lowering drug for high risk patients as a therapeutic option. If I were a patient that …show more content…
The report is way too long and detailed. The authors of these report made it too long that someone who is treating patients with cholesterol does not have time to read the entire report because they have patient to attend to. The report is also too detailed, for a broad audience. It is specific about the different types of patients such as low risk, moderate risk, and high risk. It also goes into details in regards to how much milligrams are needed for each of the patients. Although I am in the healthcare field, my profession lies within the dental field, for me it is pointless putting the amount of milligrams in the report because I cannot perform these tasks and I do not treat these type of people. Finally, the report also does not seem inviting into something I would want to read because of its long headline. The report is also too repetitive with word such as evidence, trials, and therapeutic. As a reader this report is not interesting and relevant to