Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Magnetic resonance Imaging(MRI)-a noninvasive diagnostic [#permalink]
02 Jun 2005, 02:23
80% (02:25) correct
20% (01:11) wrong based on 5 sessions
Magnetic resonance Imaging(MRI)-a noninvasive diagnostic procedure can be used to identify blockages in the coronary arteries.In contrast to angiograms-the invasive procedure customarily used -MRI's pose no risk to patients.Thus to gaurantee patient safety, in the attempt to diagnose arterial blockages ,MRI's shoulf replace angiograms in all attempts at diagnosing coronary blockages.
Which of the following would most support the recommendation above?
a)Angiograms can be used to diagnose conditions other than blockages in arteries
b)MRI's were designed primarily in order to diagnose blockages in the coronary arteries
c)Angiograms reveal more information about the nature of blockage than a MRI can
d)An MRI is just as likely as an angiogram to identify an arterial blockage
e)Some patients for whom an angiogram presents no risk are unwilling to undergo an MRI
premise: I don't like this question because it seems to play on a subtle difference between diagnosis of arterial blockages and diagnosis of coronary blockages, and I am not supposed to know the difference!
A: out. weakens
C. out. weakens
E. out. weakens.
it is a tough choice b/w B and D.
MRI's should replace angiograms in all attempts at diagnosing coronary blockages.
Given my premise about the question, my final answer is B.
MRI's were designed primarily in order to diagnose blockages in the coronary arteries while D talks about:
An MRI is just as likely as an angiogram to identify an arterial blockage
(B) would be the best option. If it was designed primarily in order to diagnose blockages in coronary arteries, then the method would be perfected with the one function in mind.
(A) just serves to say that an Angiograms serves many other purposes.
(C) goes to say MRI is not as good as an Angiogram
(D) looks like a good choice. If an MRI scan is equally capable to identify an arterial blockage, then it should be used since it's a safer method.
(E) goes to indicate that patients have no confidence in the procedure.
Between (D) and (B), I would go with (B). We're already told that MRI is safe, so this premise holds for both (D) and (B). But (B) is stronger as we're told the primary purpose of MRI is to locate blockage in coronary arteries.
The argument - replace angiogram with MRI - Why? Because they are safer. However, at the least they shud be able to have the same functionality as angiogram. D says that. Just because MRI is designed to detect coronary arteries, it doesn't mean it is better than angiogram functionalitywise.
Re: Magnetic resonance Imaging(MRI)-a noninvasive diagnostic [#permalink]
13 Dec 2011, 01:53
b)MRI's were designed primarily in order to diagnose blockages in the coronary arteries Ok, if MRI's have some features that is interior than angiogram, then MRI should not be replaced. So, this answer is wrong. d)An MRI is just as likely as an angiogram to identify an arterial blockage
This answer support MRI have 1 feature better than angiogram. Other features are the same. So, support.