Graduation Thesis Revision

Hi, I reviewed the graduation project carefully, and there are several academic, grammatical, structural, and formatting issues that need to be revised before the final submission. Overall, the topic is strong and relevant; however, the writing quality and academic presentation require significant improvement to meet graduation project standards.

First, the language throughout the project needs major revision because many sentences are awkwardly written, repetitive, unclear, or not academically professional. There is excessive repetition of words such as such, thus, and within, which makes the writing sound unnatural and AI-generated. Some sentences are also grammatically incorrect or meaningless academically. For example, the sentence There are no volunteers to think about understanding the problem is completely incorrect and should be removed entirely.

The acknowledgment section also needs to be rewritten in a more professional academic style. Expressions such as Nobody else can claim such expertise are too exaggerated and informal for academic writing. Several sentences in this section contain grammar mistakes and unnatural phrasing that require correction.

Additionally, there are multiple issues with structure and formatting. The hypotheses section is incorrectly numbered because H2 is repeated twice instead of using H1, H2, and H3 properly. Some objectives are poorly written and should be revised using clearer academic wording. Please also ensure consistency throughout the paper by changing all AI based terms into AI-based.

The abstract is too long, repetitive, and wordy. It should be shortened into a concise academic abstract including only the background, aim, methodology, key findings, and conclusion. Some medical and academic terms are also used incorrectly or awkwardly.

The literature review is highly descriptive and repetitive without enough critical analysis or comparison between studies. More scholarly discussion is needed instead of repeatedly describing the same concepts. In addition, the number of references is insufficient for a graduation project, and more recent peer-reviewed references related to AI in nursing, ICU technologies, nursing informatics, and healthcare AI systems should be added. Please also verify all references and DOIs to ensure they are authentic and correctly formatted according to APA 7th edition.

There are also issues in the methodology and results sections. The study mentions statistically significant relationships; however, no actual statistical values such as p-values, chi-square values, correlation coefficients, or regression results are included. Proper statistical evidence should be added to support the findings. Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 are also repetitive and should be reorganized to avoid repeating the same information.

Furthermore, several operational definitions are too weak academically and require stronger wording supported by references. The discussion chapter also needs deeper comparison with previous studies rather than simply repeating the results.

Please also revise the formatting of headings, spacing, punctuation, tables, figures, citations, and alignment throughout the document to ensure consistency and professionalism.

Specific page-by-page issues:

Page 2:

– This is a real study work of ours grammatically weak and not academically appropriate.

– The work contained in this project has not been submitted should be rewritten professionally.

– Formatting and spacing are inconsistent.

Page 3:

– Incorrect sentence structure in the copyright declaration.

– The word surreptition is completely incorrect and inappropriate academically.

– The entire copyright paragraph should be rewritten professionally.

Page 4:

– Acknowledgment section contains weak grammar and overly informal expressions.

– Nobody else can claim such expertise is not suitable for academic writing.

– ICU nurses participated should be ICU nurses who participated.

– research is possible should be research was possible.

Abstract:

– Too long and repetitive.

– Contains awkward medical terminology and weak academic wording.

– Several sentences need restructuring and shortening.

Page 5:

– Repetitive wording and excessive use of hyphens.

– AI based predictive systems should consistently be AI-based predictive systems.

– Several paragraphs are repetitive and poorly connected.

Page 6:

– Delete the sentence There are no volunteers to think about understanding the problem.

– Duplicate sentence: The aims of the study were: The objectives of the study were:

– Hypotheses numbering is incorrect.

– The profession of ICU nurses should be replaced with years of ICU experience or ICU nursing experience.

Page 7:

– Literature review lacks critical analysis.

– Excessive repetition of similar concepts and wording.

– Limited citations.

Page 8:

– Multiple grammar errors and weak transitions between paragraphs.

– Repetitive wording throughout the page.

Page 9:

– Methodology wording sounds repetitive and AI-generated.

– within time should be in time.

– Some explanations are unnecessarily repetitive.

Page 10:

– Unclear sentence structures.

– Sampling technique explanation needs more academic justification.

Page 11:

– Weak academic phrasing in validity and reliability sections.

– participating researchers should be participating nurses.

Page 12:

– most of the ICUs that were studied were over 40 years of age is incorrect because ICUs cannot have ages.

– Several interpretations require grammatical correction.

Page 13:

– IC environments should be ICU environments.

– Some wording is vague and academically weak.

Page 14:

– Grammar and terminology issues.

– socioecological gaps is not appropriate in this context.

Page 15:

– Missing statistical interpretation.

– Weak wording in results interpretation.

Page 16:

– Repetition between Chapter 4 and Chapter 5.

– Excessive repetition of technologies.

Page 17:

– Discussion section lacks depth and critical comparison with previous studies.

– Several awkward academic expressions.

Page 18:

– Recommendations are repetitive and too general.

– References are insufficient and require APA revision.Also, most of the references used in the project should be recent and updated. Please make sure the majority of references are published between 2021 and 2026, especially because the topic is related to artificial intelligence and healthcare technologies, which are rapidly evolving fields. Older references should only be used if they are essential foundational studies. The literature review currently lacks enough recent peer-reviewed studies, so more updated journal articles from databases such as PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar should be added. In addition, all references and DOIs need to be verified carefully to ensure they are authentic, accessible, and correctly formatted according to APA 7th edition guidelines.A plagiarism report from Turnitin.

WRITE MY PAPER