alimad wrote:
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and thus do not
require surgery, are given follow-up x-rays because their orthopedists
are concerned about possibly having misjudged the stability of the fracture.
When a number of follow-up x-rays were reviewed, however, all
the fractures that had initially been judged stable were found to have
healed correctly. Therefore, it is a waste of money to order follow-up
x-rays of ankle fracture initially judged stable.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. Doctors who are general practitioners rather than orthopedists are
less likely than orthopedists to judge the stability of an ankle fracture
correctly.
B. Many ankle injuries for which an initial x-ray is ordered are revealed
by the x-ray not to involve any fracture of the ankle.
C. X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists working in several
hospitals were reviewed.
D. The healing of ankle fractures that have been surgically repaired is
always checked by means of a follow-up x-ray.
E. Orthopedists routinely order follow-up x-rays for fractures of bone
other than ankle bones.
A - Additional information irrelevant to the discussion
B - Additional information that strengthens the discussion - keep
C - Additional information that strengthens the discussion (to a lesser extent) - keep
D - Info. out of scope - talking about ankle fractures that are surgically reparied.
E - Not relevant.
Between B and C, I choose B. Wait for your responses. Thanks
GENERAL METHOD:In CR, Strengthen and Assumption are always considered the most difficult questions. To solve Strengthen question, we should:
- Identify the conclusion - This is what you're trying to strengthen. MOST important.
- Personalize the argument if you can.
- Look for weaknesses in the argument - It seems contradict, but in real GMAT, the answers are always used to eliminate that weakness. Frankly, that's the logic GMAC uses
Avoid Shell game that always support a conclusion that is similar to, but slightly different from the one in the question.APPLY:
Premise: Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, --> do not require surgery, are given follow-up x-rays
Premise: When follow-up x-rays were reviewed, however, all the fractures that had initially been judged stable were found to have healed correctly
Conclusion: it is a waste of money to order follow-up x-rays of ankle fracture initially judged stable
What is the weakness: Do the follow-up x-rays that were reviewed by the doctors represent for all follow-up x-rays in general - KEY Point.
Best answer will eliminate that weakness.
CONSIDER EACH ANSWERS:A. Doctors who are
general practitioners rather than orthopedists are less likely than orthopedists to judge the stability of an ankle fracture correctly. - WRONG - Out of scope.
B. Many ankle injuries for which an initial x-ray is ordered are revealed by the x-ray not to involve any fracture of the ankle.
- WRONG - SHELL GAME - Please re-read the conclusion, "it is a waste of money to order follow-up x-rays of ankle fracture initially judged stable". The conclusion is only about the ankle fracture initially judged stable, not all ankle injuries in general. On the other hand, B is TOO GENERAL, It does NOT support a conclusion we need to strengthen. C. X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists working in several hospitals were reviewed.
- CORRECT - Eliminate the weakness perfectly.D. The healing of ankle fractures that have been
surgically repaired is always checked by means of a follow-up x-ray. - WRONG - Out of scope
E. Orthopedists routinely order follow-up x-rays for
fractures of bone other than ankle bones. - WRONG - Out of scope.
I hope it could help.
_____________________________
Please
kudo if my post helps. Thank you