It is currently 28 Jun 2017, 12:56

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 844
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2005, 09:20
8
KUDOS
33
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

60% (02:23) correct 40% (01:43) wrong based on 2438 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 45
Page: 134
Difficulty:

Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and thus do not require surgery, are given follow-up x-ray 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.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by Narenn on 07 Oct 2013, 10:41, edited 3 times in total.
Necessary Corrections for Official Guide Verbal Review 2nd Edition Project
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 271
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2005, 13:35
7
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and thus do not require surgery, are given follow-up x-ray 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.

No OA on this one - we will need to come to a consensus[/quote]

I pick C because when i read the argument, the first thing that i though of was 'was the survey big enough' which fits in with C.

anyway using POE:
A compares GPs and orthos....no relevance
B talks about injuries without fracture...no relevance
C tells you that the study was extensive and done in a variety of environments, thus strengthening the fact that you can make a generalised conclusion like the one above..
D tells you that followups are done...which doesnt strengthen the argument
E says that orthos do follow ups on other injuries too...this weakens the conclusion if anything...because if they do it for other things, why should they stop for ankles.

The only remaining answer is C

well thats my way of thinking in any case
obviously could be completely off
Director
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 606

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 09:33
I think A weakens the argument in explaining why there could have an interest to make some X-ray follow up...
Director
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 606

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 09:52
My vision of the stem was :

Even orthos who are the best able to judge if a fracture will heal correctly or not are prescribing some xray even unnecessarily

Doctors are less likely than orthopedists to judge the stability of an ankle fracture correctly : why does it strengthen there is no more need of follow up whereas doctors are less experienced in that matter ?

Moreover I guess it is a scope shift introducing a new category.
Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 897

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 10:16
C. All the ans choices but C seems weird.
Manager
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 212
Location: Taipei
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Sep 2006, 06:57
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and thus do not require surgery, are given follow-up x-ray 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.
Director
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 899
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Dec 2006, 20:38
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and thus do not require surgery, are given follow-up x-ray 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.
Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 912

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2007, 21:33
Fistail wrote:
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and thus do not require surgery, are given follow-up x-ray 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.

Conclusion: it is a waste of money to have patients get follow up x-rays for ankle fracture initially judged stable.
Therefore, if the initial x-ray is good, then doing follow ups would be unnecessary. Answer B states this and strengthens the argument.
Intern
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 2

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2007, 22:26
1
KUDOS
Why is it B? The conclusion states that, "it is a waste of money to order follow-up x-rays of ankle fracture initially judged stable." The conclusion states that the ankle is already fractured, which means that answer B is out of scope as its subject is about "many ankle injuries" in a broad sense (and not just to those pertaining to ankle fractures).

I think the answer is C because the conclusion is based upon a review of "a number of follow-up x-rays." I think the question pertains to the issue of sample size and accuracy. If (as it is with answer choice C), the sample was drawn from several sources, then the findings from the sample size become less biased and more robust which would then strengthen the conclusion.
Manager
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 106
Re: CR - SET 24 Q22 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2007, 18:03
spider wrote:
Would go with E

E weakens the argument.

If they are doing follow up xrays for a reason other then checking the intitial fracture then assumption linking the premise and the conclusion is destroyed.

premise: follow up xrays are found to have a healed fracture, and the conclusion: therefore, follow up xrays shouldnt be done.
assumption: follow up xrays are done only to check the initial fractutre.
Weaken: Xrays are done for a reason other then checking the initial fracture
Manager
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 106

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2007, 18:07
singh_amit19 wrote:
Assumption: Ankle fracture judged stable - is diagnosed accurately so doesnt require any follow up x-rays

A seems close to tht....

A is out of scope because General Practitioners are not mentioned. The argument is talking about Orthopedists so what the General Practitioners do is irrelevant.

Even if you could make a broad assumption that the argument is referring to all doctors then this would weaken the argument if anything because there would then be a need to do follow up xrays because the General Practitioners cant accurately judge the ankle fracture intially.
Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 138

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2007, 20:19
To me, E is the answer.

The argument is over whether its a wastage of money to go for follow up X ray for Ankle fracture.

E says that follow X rays is for bone fracture and not for ankle fracture. Which means, follow us for Ankle fracture X ray will lead to waste of money.

please correct me if I am wrong.
Manager
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 106

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2007, 22:08
4
KUDOS
yash500 wrote:
JDMBA - thanks but still I have question related to answer C.

C says -
C. X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists working in several hospitals were reviewed.

Does it means that X rays from orthopedists suspected whether its true or false and hence gone for review????

No this is not what it is saying.

The author is taking data and drawing a specific conclusion from it. Whenever you see a survey, sample, poll, etc. You should always be suspect of whether the data is representative of the whole.

For instance, if you read about polls for presidentail elections back in the 1920's the polls would indicate that a certain president would win by an overwhelming majority. However, the polls were conducted via telephone and only wealthy citizens had a telephone and the conclusion reached by the poll was not representative of the total population. Hence the prediction was wrong.

In the case of this argument, the author points to a sample of Xrays that were done a second time and the injury was always healed. What if this sample is only from the Worlds Greatest Orthopedist? Would the data gathered from this Orthopedist be representative of all Orthopedists? No. This would make it impossible for anyone to make a conclusion that 2nd xrays should never be done.

So by saying that the data is gathered from "many different orthopedists working in several hospitals", you are confirming that the data is representative and therefore strengthening the argument by eliminating the possibilty that the data is representative of only the Worlds Greatest Orthopedist.
Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 637

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2007, 07:26
I will go with
E. Orthopedists routinely order follow-up x-rays for fractures of bone other than ankle bones.

If orthopedists routinely DO NOT order follow up x-rays for fractures of ankle bones, then they may presume that fractures of ankle bones need not be x-rayed. Although it might have been better to qualify the choice with 'stable' ankle fractures rather than just 'fractures', it is the best of the lot, I guess.

C. X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists working in several
hospitals were reviewed.

I would have chosen (C) if it were more specific. X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists....patients need not have ankle injuries but some other bone related injuries.

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.

I would have chose (B) if it said many ankle 'fractures' and not 'injuries'.
Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2007
Posts: 147
Schools: UCLA Anderson School of Mgmt (FEMBA Class of 2013)
WE 1: 7.5 years in Engg. Consulting

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2007, 11:35
I will go with D also.

If doctors check the healing of surgically repaired ankle by means of X-ray, it follows that taking X-rays are good enough to identify whether it is stable or not and therefore, if they can do this initiall and judge that it is stable then no more x-rays are required.

However, I am not 100% convinced with this either , but feel better than other choices.

C does not say anything that will help in saying that one time x-ray is good enough.
Manager
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 50

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2007, 21:21
vscid wrote:
Try this one chums:

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.

Like most GMAT verbal questions, the difficulty is not in the passage but in the answer choices. GMAT verbal does intentionally make the answer choices unncessarily verbose and confusing. GMAT should test the logical reasoning of test takers, not the ability to clear confusion in a bad written English sentence. Unfortunately, this is the way GMAT operates and it is unfair to non-native English speakers.

In CR, it's very important that you can distinguish between the premises and the conclusion. Then it's much simpler to answer the question.

I actually picked B before looking at all the responses and answers. The conclusion of the passage is: "It's a waste of money to order follow-up x-ray of ankle fractures intially judged stable." The premise that strengthens the conclusion above would provide fact/information that further prove that taking x-ray is unecessary and wasteful. Of all answer choices, B shows that many x-rays ordered for ankle injuries do not show fracture of the ankle. Thus, it makes follow-up x-rays unnecessary & wasteful.

Wonder if that makes sense?
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Feb 2008
Posts: 311
Re: CR - Ankle fractures [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2008, 09:44
JCLEONES 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. (wrong choice. This fails to strengthen the argument)
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. (This does not prove anything. Wrong choice)
C. X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists working in several
hospitals were reviewed. (Strengthens the argument. Several orthopedists have confirmed this result. ) Correct.
D. The healing of ankle fractures that have been surgically repaired is
always checked by means of a follow-up x-ray. (unecessary)
E. Orthopedists routinely order follow-up x-rays for fractures of bone
other than ankle bones.
(irrelevant)
Manager
Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 200
Re: Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable , and do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2012, 12:40
I have chosen the answer C for this question:

A. We are not really concerned about general practitioners in this case, so this is irrelevant. Also, if doctors are generally less likely to judge the stability of an ankle fracture correctly, this would be a reason to actually keep doing x-rays - this statement would actually weaken the argument.

B. We are concerned about the "follow-up x-rays" once a fracture has been determined. This answer choice states that "initial x-rays" are ordered for ankle injuries. Although this may seem like a good answer, the situations are not quite the same. Therefore, this is irrelevant information.

C. At first glance, I wasn't sure that this answer was correct. However, I looked at the statement "When a number of follow up x-rays were reviewed..." and determined that in order to strengthen the argument, you might want to close the "weakening" gap. A way to weaken this argument might be to say that all the reviewed x-rays were done by a single orthopedist. In order strengthen this argument, we would counter by saying that we have a very representative sample of patients who were reviewed by many different orthopedists.

D. We are not concerned with ankle fractures that have been surgically repaired (unstable fractures).

E. We only care about ankle fractures in this argument, not about x-rays for fractures in other bones.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1127
Location: United States
Re: Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2013, 22:00
3
KUDOS
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.

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
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 329
Re: Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable , and do [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2013, 12:44
ronniebassist wrote:
Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable , and 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 fractures 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 bones other than ankle bones.

Author's main point is We don't need follow up X rays after the ankle fracture become stable. He supports this argument by saying that :
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
Now their are many ways to strengthen the argument. In such questions involving data one can strengthen argument by adding more dimension to the data. Example here you can say that - data from different orthopedists was observed to another dimension to the argument and make it more plausible.

That's what choice C does. hence it is the answer.

Another way to think about it is :In case the premise was :
When a data from different Orthopedists x-rays was reviewed,however , all the fractures that had initially been judged stable were found to have healed correctly

The current premise would have strengthen it. ie Number of x rays from different orthopedists were studied.

Looking at other options :

(A) Doctors who are general practitioners rather than orthopedists are less likely than orthopedists to judge the stability of an ankle fracture correctly.
// We don't care about other doctors interpretations. out.

(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.
//It talks about initial x rays. this doesn't affect out conclusion.out.

(C) X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists working in several hospitals were reviewed.//Correct.

(D) The healing of ankle fractures that have been surgically repaired is always checked by means of a follow-up x-ray.
// This actually weakens the author's argument.

(E) Orthopedists routinely order follow-up x-rays for fractures of bones other than ankle bones.
[i]//other bones? This doesn't support our argument. If anything it weakens it.[/i]

Last edited by Narenn on 05 Oct 2013, 11:37, edited 1 time in total.
All similar threads have been merged.
Re: Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable , and do   [#permalink] 21 Jun 2013, 12:44

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 24 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 It is often thought that 1 09 May 2017, 06:29
2 Often patients with ankle fractures 3 20 Jun 2016, 21:53
14 Monarchy, a stable form of government for many centuries, 12 22 Apr 2016, 20:58
1 Both a stable government and good climate are essential for 1 28 May 2017, 11:47
7 A psychologist is treating a patient with multiple 8 23 Oct 2016, 11:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by