|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Updated on: 04 Apr 2025, 12:52
Originally posted by Sajjad1994 on 03 Sep 2020, 01:11.
Last edited by Bunuel on 04 Apr 2025, 12:52, edited 3 times in total.
Last edited by Bunuel on 04 Apr 2025, 12:52, edited 3 times in total.
Moved to new forum
Kudos
Bookmarks
From the mid-1980s through the early-2000s, specialty substance abuse centers, facilities that provide both residential and outpatient treatment services, emerged as dominant players in national substance abuse treatment. During the early to mid-1990s, expensive inpatient and residential treatment, viewed as less cost effective than intensive outpatient treatment models, were targeted as an area for cost-cutting, particularly for private insurance.
Concurrently, and throughout this time period, sales of prescription drugs have remained a minor portion of spending for substance abuse treatment. Only a few drugs are available to treat substance disorders. In 2004, acamprosate joined two, other previously FDA approved medications–disulfiram and naltrexone–for the treatment of alcoholism. Buprenorphine for the for the treatment of opiate addiction was approved in 2002. Methadone for treatment of opioid addiction is not available as a retail prescription drug and spending for methadone is included with specialty substance abuse centers.
Concurrently, and throughout this time period, sales of prescription drugs have remained a minor portion of spending for substance abuse treatment. Only a few drugs are available to treat substance disorders. In 2004, acamprosate joined two, other previously FDA approved medications–disulfiram and naltrexone–for the treatment of alcoholism. Buprenorphine for the for the treatment of opiate addiction was approved in 2002. Methadone for treatment of opioid addiction is not available as a retail prescription drug and spending for methadone is included with specialty substance abuse centers.
Overall spending on substance abuse expenditures more than doubled from 1986 to 2003.: True
Private spending on substance abuse is expected to decrease only marginally in the projections from 2003 through 2006 and to 2014.: False
Private spending on mental health expenditures in 1986 was greater or expected to be greater than public other state and local such expenditures in any year listed.: False
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
57% (03:41) correct
43%
(03:43)
wrong
based on 154
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
1. If it is true that, unlike any other payer, private spending (three listed private categories combined) on substance abuse services grew only from $4.6 billion in 1986 to $4.7 in 2003 at an average annual growth rate of only 0.1%, which of the following statements can be determined to be accurate. Select True if it can be determined to be accurate from the information in the tabs. Otherwise, select False.
| True | False | |
| Overall spending on substance abuse expenditures more than doubled from 1986 to 2003. | ||
| Private spending on substance abuse is expected to decrease only marginally in the projections from 2003 through 2006 and to 2014. | ||
| Private spending on mental health expenditures in 1986 was greater or expected to be greater than public other state and local such expenditures in any year listed. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Overall spending on substance abuse expenditures more than doubled from 1986 to 2003.: True
Private spending on substance abuse is expected to decrease only marginally in the projections from 2003 through 2006 and to 2014.: False
Private spending on mental health expenditures in 1986 was greater or expected to be greater than public other state and local such expenditures in any year listed.: False
specialty substance abuse centers.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
85%
(hard)
Question Stats:
44% (01:29) correct
56%
(01:31)
wrong
based on 210
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
2. It can be inferred from the information in the tabs that the entities most likely to benefit from increased governmental subsidies for the projected period would be
| FDA-approved pharmaceutical companies. | |
| in-patient and residential treatment facilities. | |
| Medicare and Medicaid recipients. | |
| private insurers. | |
| specialty substance abuse centers. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
specialty substance abuse centers.
Alcohol-induced or drug-induced psychoses.: Yes
Methadone administration.: Yes
Pervasive development disorders.: No
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
75% (01:10) correct
25%
(01:06)
wrong
based on 200
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
3. For each of the following, select Yes if it is a likely treatment area for specialty substance abuse treatment centers as indicated in the tabs. Otherwise, select No.
| Yes | No | |
| Alcohol-induced or drug-induced psychoses. | ||
| Methadone administration. | ||
| Pervasive development disorders. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Alcohol-induced or drug-induced psychoses.: Yes
Methadone administration.: Yes
Pervasive development disorders.: No
Attachment:
1wq.jpg [ 59.49 KiB | Viewed 7558 times ]
Attachment:
3.jpg [ 137.4 KiB | Viewed 7620 times ]
Improved version of this question is discussed HERE.
18 Apr 2022, 05:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
(A)
-(1)
as A the prompt indicates, private spending grew from $4.6 billion in 1986 to $4.7 billion in 2003, and the graph in tab2 shows that the private/public spending ratio is 50/50 in 1986 to 75/25 in 2003, if we assume private sector, in 1986, spend x=4.6 billion dollar in drug abuse, then it be (x+1) billion dollar in 2003, thus according to the ratio of public/private spending in tab2, we could deduce that the total amount of spending is 2x billion in 1986 while in 2003 the total be 3(x+1)+(x+1)=4x+4, the statement of the overall spending is "more than double" from 1986 to 2003 is true
-(2)
we know that "the real amount of spending in private sector grew at a relatively slow rate in 1986 to 2003", also the graph in tab2 shows that "the ratio of public/private spending grew at an accelerated rate in these years", combine the two clues above we arrive that the trend of private spending on substance abuse is expected to decrease "largely", rather than only slightly, from the year since 2003, so A-(2) is false
-(3)
from the graph in tab2 we could only see the ratio of public/private spending in 1986 2003 2006 2014, for any specific year we aren't given any info from this, thus A-(3) is false
(B)
its clear that (a) & (d) won't ever benefit from government subsidy, which only service the public and patients, they're in its attrubute private as well as for-profit organization, and (b) is wrong for the first sentence in tab1 "outpatient service....", (e) must be correct for the the first sentence in tab1 "From the mid-1980s through the early-2000s, specialty substance abuse centers, facilities....", as for (c), there only given the info of the ratio of public spending in medicaid or medicare and it indeed is increasing, but whether government subsidy and medicaid or medicaid is the same thing is still mote to debate, so (c) is more uncertain as an answer choice
(C)
infer from the individual six items in tab3, include the first the third and the sixth one, as well as the last sentence in tab1 which refer to "methodone", so the answer for (C) is Yes Yes No
-(1)
as A the prompt indicates, private spending grew from $4.6 billion in 1986 to $4.7 billion in 2003, and the graph in tab2 shows that the private/public spending ratio is 50/50 in 1986 to 75/25 in 2003, if we assume private sector, in 1986, spend x=4.6 billion dollar in drug abuse, then it be (x+1) billion dollar in 2003, thus according to the ratio of public/private spending in tab2, we could deduce that the total amount of spending is 2x billion in 1986 while in 2003 the total be 3(x+1)+(x+1)=4x+4, the statement of the overall spending is "more than double" from 1986 to 2003 is true
-(2)
we know that "the real amount of spending in private sector grew at a relatively slow rate in 1986 to 2003", also the graph in tab2 shows that "the ratio of public/private spending grew at an accelerated rate in these years", combine the two clues above we arrive that the trend of private spending on substance abuse is expected to decrease "largely", rather than only slightly, from the year since 2003, so A-(2) is false
-(3)
from the graph in tab2 we could only see the ratio of public/private spending in 1986 2003 2006 2014, for any specific year we aren't given any info from this, thus A-(3) is false
(B)
its clear that (a) & (d) won't ever benefit from government subsidy, which only service the public and patients, they're in its attrubute private as well as for-profit organization, and (b) is wrong for the first sentence in tab1 "outpatient service....", (e) must be correct for the the first sentence in tab1 "From the mid-1980s through the early-2000s, specialty substance abuse centers, facilities....", as for (c), there only given the info of the ratio of public spending in medicaid or medicare and it indeed is increasing, but whether government subsidy and medicaid or medicaid is the same thing is still mote to debate, so (c) is more uncertain as an answer choice
(C)
infer from the individual six items in tab3, include the first the third and the sixth one, as well as the last sentence in tab1 which refer to "methodone", so the answer for (C) is Yes Yes No
22 Jun 2024, 21:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
Sajjad1994 kindly share the official explanation.
thanks
thanks
