why I proofread
Posted By: oops! on 2008-01-08
In Reply to:
sometimes my expansions get away from me. I just typed that patient -- had abdominal discomfort for the last menstrual period. Made sense until I remembered it was a male patient!
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
PROOFREAD PROOFREAD PROOFREAD
PROOFREAD PROOFREAD PROOFREAD PROOFREAD
Yes,,, and that is why you also proofread. nm
:P
How do you proofread? sm
What is the fastest, most accurate way you proofread? I have been playing back my reports from the beginning of it on fast chipmunk sounding speed. I catch myself making exapander errors a lot. I
absolutely have to proofread as I usually catch at least 2 per report before I send them. Trying to proofread 'as I go' does not work for me as I still find mistakes when I am done. What is the Fastest way of doing this? Does anyone have any advice? Thank you muchos.
I proofread as I go
The only time I go back to listen again is if I have a blank, or sometimes with a difficult ESL I will go back and listen for a second time, but 99% of the time I proof as I go.
proofread?
I don't proofread - that is QA job. How do you think I could edit over 650 lines an hour? It's not by double-checking my own fine self.
It is probably better to proofread as you go
as that can be a careless way to proof. Starting a new account can be overwhelming and cause you to make careless errors. I would say proof new accounts, but once familiar, then proof as you type. Put frequently made statements in auto correct or use an expander. If the client requires QA, then it is QA's job to catch the errors of the entire document, not just blanks, otherwise, they are getting paid to simply say your work has been QA'd. I think QA is a waste of time myself other than for a second-listen at blanks, and in my case, I have enough experience to have even corrected QA on many of occasions with a reply from QA stating, so sorry my mistake. No one is perfect, but you should not send blatent errors to QA and expect them to correct them. In most cases, they will not. QA is simply a way for a company to pay you less as a typist and you think you are getting something for it in the way of them providing you a second look/listen, which is not true.
They should still be able to proofread and/or
x
Here's a term for you to proofread:
Look that one up!
LOL
Maybe I should clarify, that I would definitely proofread everything if... SM
it was a new account or I had just started a new job. I'll be honest though, I have started jobs with services where while I'm in training, I take my time, proofread everything because I know that I'm being scrutinized. When released from training, I stopped re-reading everything.
I also have never been afraid to argue with QA if I didn't agree. That didn't make me popular for sure and probably my work was scrutinized even closer because they wanted to catch me in a mistake, but they also knew that if they counted me off for something, they had better be 100% right.
I'm not arrogant, just good at what I do and confident. I take pride in my work and I've been doing this for a long time. I just think some QA people need to consider each MT and mistake individually. If you've got an experienced MT who is good and productive and she makes a few minor mistakes from time to time, let it go. Maybe mention it to her in a friendly email, but don't fail her on QA for a period or hyphen or a typo.
That's all I'm saying.
Sorry, but we disagree. I proofread as I go. sm
The places I work for expect things to be ready to go directly to the client. I guess if that works for you and you feel good about yourself, more power to you, but not for me. I don't consider proofing your work to be sitting and re-reading the entire report before you send it -- that's nonsense -- but to think you don't have to look at what you are doing and just let some QA "correction fairy" be your safety net is not professional. I take pride in turning out a quality product and I still manage to provide the quantity too -- there are those of who do BOTH, you know.
"dictated but not proofread"... nm
x
It would be nice if they would have proofread it first...sm
Notify "American's".... this is not possessive, people, it is plural, Americans.
I don't proofread on this board. sm
Wouldn't do any good anyway folks would still complain. Sounds like you are one of them that just want to rip me apart for telling the truth. Plenty of other MTs that hold the same opinons I do about this profession.
If that's all you can pick at me apart is a typo in a paragraph that's a good thing!
You are being too hard on yourself. Proofread after you transcribe to the best of your
ability. If errors are returned to you, then keep a notebook with the mistakes you are making. Refer to your notebook before you begin transcribing. Before you know it, the errors will be less. On the othe hand, if you keep making the same mistakes over and over again, even after keeping notes and reviewing, then you probably really do not like this type of work. Not everyone is cut out for it. It sounds like when you were in-house, you did not transcribe full-time but had varied work duties. I would try the notbook and see how what goes first.
After 18 yrs, I proofread as I go.. Nobody should sit and reread every word when on production.
x
Can't assume samples are correct! Always proofread everything. nm
s
I may even be able to proofread and catch spelling errors (interruptions)!
I find that by rewinding and relistening to the dictation as I proofread...sm
I will find a few little things I missed that I wouldn't catch just by proofing because it actually made sense but I might have missed something.
Actually it's years to ears. I can spell just fine, just don't take the time to proofread eve
post as I'm busy transcribing at the same time. Sorry to say my priorities are such that you guys here don't rank perfect posts. Now, if you guys want to pay per post.... 
I hope you proofread your reports closer than you proofed this post
No offense, but it kinda makes me cringe. And, no, I'm not the OP. I just had to read your post a couple of times to comprehend it through all of the typos.
I've proofread legal documents; not difficult, but extremely dull.
In addition to MT QA, I worked for a large law firm proofreading about 15 hours per week. The pay was good. The work was incredibly dull. The terminology was new and different at first, of course, but there are resources on the web for legal terminology just as there are for medical terminology.
you proofread all business letters you receive in the mail and have fits over the errors! LOL (nm)
|
