Last visit was: 02 Sep 2026, 15:38 It is currently 02 Sep 2026, 15:38
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
805+ (Hard)|   Weaken|         
User avatar
PJ8
Joined: 08 Jun 2026
Last visit: 30 Jul 2026
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 21
Kudos: 13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
puncuz
Joined: 03 Feb 2025
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 27
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 45
Posts: 27
Kudos: 16
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Parry104
Joined: 30 Oct 2025
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 28
Own Kudos:
26
 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Operations
GRE 1: Q170 V158
GPA: 3.14
Products:
GRE 1: Q170 V158
Posts: 28
Kudos: 26
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
heyaa
Joined: 19 Dec 2024
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 70
Own Kudos:
60
 [1]
Given Kudos: 46
Location: India
Posts: 70
Kudos: 60
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
imo (D).
A: doesn't talk about exact scale of of error.
B: Questions says that mostly completed the whole trial without any interruptions.
C: irrelevant
D: Correct - if we take average over a long period of time it can make even good drop in pain score modest and undermine the data.(12 and 4 weeks)
E: irrelevant
User avatar
anushree01
Joined: 06 Apr 2024
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 251
Own Kudos:
90
 [1]
Given Kudos: 181
Products:
Posts: 251
Kudos: 90
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I will go with option D, looking at the average that the question mentions
Bunuel
A pharmaceutical company recently completed a 12-week clinical trial of a new painkiller, in which nearly all patients completed the full dosing schedule without interruption. A researcher analyzing the results concluded that the drug had provided little meaningful relief to patients, pointing to data showing that the average reduction in pain scores across the full course of the trial was only modest.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher's conclusion?

(A) Among patients who entered the trial with the highest initial pain scores, average reductions by the end of the study were greater than those observed in patients who began with only mild or moderate pain.

(B) Patients who adhered to the prescribed dosing schedule without interruption reported substantially greater pain reductions than those who missed at least one dose during the trial.

(C) Patients who were given a placebo rather than the drug reported similarly modest reductions in pain scores over the same 12-week period.

(D) Pain score reductions among patients in the trial were negligible during the first eight weeks but accelerated sharply in the final four weeks as the drug reached its full therapeutic concentration in the bloodstream.

(E) The chronic pain condition targeted by the drug is one for which all currently available treatments have historically produced only modest average reductions in standardized pain scores.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT World Cup Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
User avatar
princesskitt
Joined: 21 May 2026
Last visit: 01 Sep 2026
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 7
Products:
Posts: 17
Kudos: 13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Given Information:
12-week clinical trial of a new painkiller.
Nearly all patients completed the full dosing schedule without interruption.
Researcher's conclusion: The drug had little positive effect since the average reduction is pain scores across the data was only modest.

We need to find an option that weakens the researcher's conclusion i.e., prove that the drug did in fact show promising results, so let's weigh each option:
A. This option says that the painkiller worked better on some than others but it doesn't prove that the positive effect was significant overall. Eliminate.
B. The passage already mentions that almost all patients completed the full dosing schedule without interruption, so the few patients that didn't are merely outliers and don't have significant impact on the results. Hence, eliminate.
C. If anything, this strengthens the researcher's finding, since the placebo (i.e., fake medicine) provides the same amount of relief as the painkiller which means the painkiller isn't all that effective. Hence, eliminate.
D. This option seems promising since the negligible pain score reductions over the first two thirds (8 weeks) of the trial could skew the results towards the lower end even if there was substantial improvement in pain scores in the last 4 weeks (only one third of the duration) of the trial. Keep.
E. This option simply implies that all the drugs in the market treating the chronic pain condition in question have showed modest average reductions in pain scores which doesn't really have much to do with the efficacy of the drug in this clinical trial. Hence, irrelevant.

Therefore, our best bet is option D.
User avatar
avellanjc
Joined: 03 Jan 2025
Last visit: 01 Sep 2026
Posts: 33
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 9
Location: Ecuador
GPA: 3.84
Products:
Posts: 33
Kudos: 10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here as in all CR arguments it is essential to pinpoint the exact conclusion carefully. Here the researcher is underestimating the results of the treatment due to "showing on avg only modest reduction in pain". So the weakener must come in the form as something that renders those modest results meaningful. Usually averages hide information, and choice A, clearly shows that the modest avg reduction masks a larger reduction in pain happening in patients with highest initial pain scores.

You must be careful in not putting extra info in the conclusion that the argument is not concluding. The researcher isn't concluding that the treatment isn't effective because it doesn't work in everyone, or because a placebo can get similar results, etc. You must directly undermine the fact that the given reduction in pain is not significant or meaningful.


Regards,

Juan C. Avellan
User avatar
Sajal193
Joined: 06 Jan 2025
Last visit: 01 Sep 2026
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 5
Products:
Posts: 15
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Using POE, A weakens the conclusion by stating that individuals who had greater pain score had more than average reduction in pain. Others can be eliminated:
B - missed dose - NOPE , premise always needs to be true.
C - supports the argument rather than weakening it.
D - what if it accelerated and reached the modest levels as stated in conclusion? Eliminate.
E - again supports the conclusion.
User avatar
miniB21
Joined: 06 Sep 2024
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 98
Own Kudos:
35
 [1]
Given Kudos: 66
Products:
Posts: 98
Kudos: 35
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A - THE pain relief provided is relative to / with effect / in comparison to their initial pain levels for all patients.
B - this percentage would be a minority one, not enough to undermine the conclusion since most followed the prescription
C - We are not concerned with a side experiment with placebo drugs, in our data room, most patients took the drugs.
D - CORRECT. this proves the drug was effective, and showed significant pain relief, albeit in the final weeks which would not have been covered by research.
E - historical context is fine but neither supporting nor weakening the conclusion
User avatar
Rishm
Joined: 05 May 2024
Last visit: 01 Sep 2026
Posts: 369
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 82
Location: India
GPA: 10
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Products:
Posts: 369
Kudos: 78
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A---Doesnt help us, it talks about patients
B---Close, but it doesnt help us weaken the argument entirely.
C---Placebo, is another outside scope
D--- This is close too, but do note it talks about frequency and strengthen why it is modest.
E---Correct answer, it weakens that all drugs are like this and not specifically the one in question.
User avatar
chasing725
Joined: 22 Jun 2025
Last visit: 16 Aug 2026
Posts: 241
Own Kudos:
235
 [1]
Given Kudos: 6
Location: United States (OR)
Schools: Stanford
Schools: Stanford
Posts: 241
Kudos: 235
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Option A says that the medication worked better for patients who were in a lot of pain.. This does not change the fact that the improvement was limited on average.

Option B is not very helpful because the text already says that almost everyone finished the treatment without missing a dose. So missing doses cannot be the reason for the improvement.

Option C shows that the people who got the placebo had improvement. This actually supports what the researchers said.

Option D does make a point. It says that the pain relief was not very good for the eight weeks of the treatment.. Then it got a lot better during the last four weeks when the drug was at its strongest. This means that the medication might need some time to work properly. So if we look at the results for the whole twelve weeks we might get a wrong idea about how well the medication really works.

Option E says that the small improvement is normal, for this disease.. This does not mean that this particular drug is actually effective.

IMO Option D is correct.
User avatar
jefferyillman
Joined: 01 Dec 2024
Last visit: 01 Sep 2026
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 112
Kudos: 81
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. Greater improvement among those with highest pain. Helps those with most pain. This weakens arguement a bit.
B. This also weakens the arguement a bit. It says near all completed. So most completed the dosing. So not likely to affect overall results if not a significant number.
C. If drug not much different than placebo than actually supports arguement.
D. The timing doesn't actually total amount of relief.
E. If every effective treatment only achieves modest average pain reduction then modest reduction may be meaningful clinical relief.
User avatar
SmileAndSolve
Joined: 25 Aug 2024
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 79
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 327
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 4
Products:
Posts: 79
Kudos: 52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Researcher's conclusion = Since Avg reduction in pain score = moderate, hence, drug provided lil meaningful relief to patients
A) NO: Greater reduction might still be modest
B) NO: Greater reduction might still be modest
C) NO: Strengthen, says drug doesn't work
D) NO: Greater reduction might still be modest
E) YES: Historically, such painkillers produce modest reduction in avg pain score, so it's similar to other painkillers in output & not
Bunuel
A pharmaceutical company recently completed a 12-week clinical trial of a new painkiller, in which nearly all patients completed the full dosing schedule without interruption. A researcher analyzing the results concluded that the drug had provided little meaningful relief to patients, pointing to data showing that the average reduction in pain scores across the full course of the trial was only modest.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher's conclusion?

(A) Among patients who entered the trial with
(B) Patients who adhered to the prescribed dosing with highest initial pain scores, average reductions by the end of the study were greater than those observed in patients who began with only mild or moderate pain.
(C) Patients who were given a placebo rather than the drug reported similarly modest reductions in pain scores over the same 12-week period.
(D) Pain score reductions among patients in the trial were negligible during the first eight weeks but accelerated sharply in the final four weeks as the drug reached its full therapeutic concentration in the bloodstream.
(E) The chronic pain condition targeted by the drug is one for which all currently available treatments have historically produced only modest average reductions in standardized pain scores.
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT World Cup Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
User avatar
FlushLoop
Joined: 05 Jul 2026
Last visit: 06 Aug 2026
Posts: 62
Own Kudos:
57
 [1]
Posts: 62
Kudos: 57
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
A pharmaceutical company recently completed a 12-week clinical trial of a new painkiller, in which nearly all patients completed the full dosing schedule without interruption. A researcher analyzing the results concluded that the drug had provided little meaningful relief to patients, pointing to data showing that the average reduction in pain scores across the full course of the trial was only modest.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher's conclusion?

(A) Among patients who entered the trial with the highest initial pain scores, average reductions by the end of the study were greater than those observed in patients who began with only mild or moderate pain.

(B) Patients who adhered to the prescribed dosing schedule without interruption reported substantially greater pain reductions than those who missed at least one dose during the trial.

(C) Patients who were given a placebo rather than the drug reported similarly modest reductions in pain scores over the same 12-week period.

(D) Pain score reductions among patients in the trial were negligible during the first eight weeks but accelerated sharply in the final four weeks as the drug reached its full therapeutic concentration in the bloodstream.

(E) The chronic pain condition targeted by the drug is one for which all currently available treatments have historically produced only modest average reductions in standardized pain scores.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT World Cup Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.


A. Some patients get benefits than others but on average the results are still the same.

B. This claim does not matter much because almost everyone has already completed the experiment.

C. The experiment is comparing the drug to a treatment but the researcher wants to know if the relief was really significant not just if the drug worked better than the dummy.

D. That is correct. The researcher thinks that the average reduction, in symptoms is measured over the treatment period. If the drug only started working at the end of the trial it might seem like the benefits are smaller than they really are.

E. That is a point but it actually makes the comparisons tougher. Just because other treatments can help a lot does not mean this drug can give patients the relief they need.

IMO Option D
User avatar
priyanka06
Joined: 10 Sep 2025
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 60
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1
Products:
Posts: 60
Kudos: 35
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A> this statement states same thing as the argument, the average reduction in pain can still be modest as we don't know the number of patients with highest pain and mild pain
B> Its already mentioned in the passage nearly all patients completed full dosing. all it does not affect the researchers conclusion.
C> It points out a flaw in the method used to study , thus it undermines the researcher s claim.
D> IT can still mean that there was only modest pain reduction on average.
E> It states results of other studies which is not relevant here.

Bunuel
A pharmaceutical company recently completed a 12-week clinical trial of a new painkiller, in which nearly all patients completed the full dosing schedule without interruption. A researcher analyzing the results concluded that the drug had provided little meaningful relief to patients, pointing to data showing that the average reduction in pain scores across the full course of the trial was only modest.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher's conclusion?

(A) Among patients who entered the trial with the highest initial pain scores, average reductions by the end of the study were greater than those observed in patients who began with only mild or moderate pain.

(B) Patients who adhered to the prescribed dosing schedule without interruption reported substantially greater pain reductions than those who missed at least one dose during the trial.

(C) Patients who were given a placebo rather than the drug reported similarly modest reductions in pain scores over the same 12-week period.

(D) Pain score reductions among patients in the trial were negligible during the first eight weeks but accelerated sharply in the final four weeks as the drug reached its full therapeutic concentration in the bloodstream.

(E) The chronic pain condition targeted by the drug is one for which all currently available treatments have historically produced only modest average reductions in standardized pain scores.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT World Cup Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
User avatar
alamin8
Joined: 24 May 2025
Last visit: 29 Aug 2026
Posts: 181
Own Kudos:
79
 [1]
Given Kudos: 32
Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Accounting, Technology
GPA: 3.89
Posts: 181
Kudos: 79
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conclusion: Drug had provided little meaningful relief to patients.
Evidence: The average pain score reduction is modest throughout the clinical trial (12-weeks).

(A) We do not know about how much pain the patient had before the trial. Bad comparison. Eliminate.
(B) Another bad comparison, because nearly all the patients completed the dosing schedule. It did not provide any meaningful score whether pain was reduced moderately or not. Eliminate.
(C) Supporting the evidence, as it reported similar model reduction in pain. Eliminate.
(D) While the drug had no relief score in the first 8 weeks, but it accelerated at the end of the clinical trial and became modest. Therefore, the drug worked strongly during the last 4 weeks when it reached its full capacity. Answer.
(E) Other drug shows modest pain relief score does not mean this drug will do the same. Eliminate.

Answer: D
User avatar
rockstar09rulez
Joined: 30 Sep 2023
Last visit: 26 Aug 2026
Posts: 43
Own Kudos:
25
 [1]
Given Kudos: 74
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Technology, Finance
Products:
Posts: 43
Kudos: 25
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A - comparison amongst groups doesn't matter since the observation of average reduction being modest still holds true
B - same reason as A
C - kind of strengthens not weakens
D - highlights drug did something 'meaningful' - Ans
E - comparison with other treatments doesn't matter
User avatar
kalkurd
Joined: 31 Oct 2025
Last visit: 25 Jul 2026
Posts: 28
Own Kudos:
26
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 28
Kudos: 26
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
D.

Conclusion: Drug barely worked, because the 12-week average was modest. Gap: an average over time hides the trajectory. Nothing for 8 weeks then strong for 4 still averages low.

D: Near zero for 8 weeks, sharp jump in the final 4 as the drug hits full concentration. The modest mean is an artifact of blending a dead ramp with a strong finish. Real relief, just buried by the full-course average.

Wrong ones
A - Subgroup improved more, but the overall average stands. Does not explain the headline number.
B - Adherents beat dose-missers, however nearly all patients completed the schedule, so that split barely moves the cited average. Trap dressed as the "drug works"
C - Placebo matched the drug, strengthens the researcher. Wrong direction
E - Concedes the reduction was modest, just says rivals are too. Doesn't undermine "little relief."
User avatar
canopyinthecity
Joined: 12 Jul 2025
Last visit: 02 Sep 2026
Posts: 154
Own Kudos:
106
 [1]
Given Kudos: 24
Products:
Posts: 154
Kudos: 106
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Premise: 12 weeks - Nearly all patients have completed full dosing
Avg reduction is modest
Conclusion: Little meaningful relief

(A) Slightly Weaken
(B) Slightly Weaken
(C) Irrelevant
(D) Answer as this weakens the promise strongly and directly
(E) Not weakens
User avatar
Punt
Joined: 09 Jul 2024
Last visit: 10 Aug 2026
Posts: 96
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 18
Location: India
Posts: 96
Kudos: 77
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conclusion: the drug had provided little meaningful relief to patients, pointing to the data showing that the average reduction in pain scores across full course was only modest.

To weaken this arguement, we need to find the explantion to show that drug is not ineffective.

A - Comparision between one type of pain group to another type doesn't explains why modest score means meaningful releif or not.
B - Contracts to that data given that nearly all the patients have completed the dosing schedule.
C - It is irrelevent as it doesn't undermines the conclusion. it just shows that placebo has the same effect to the drug.
D - Speed is irrelevent to the conclusion. The conclueion talks about overall average score.
E - It explains that if historically avialble all the effective treatments have modest pain scores. That means this modest pain score may give meaningful releif. it weakens the conclusion.

Answer : E



Bunuel
A pharmaceutical company recently completed a 12-week clinical trial of a new painkiller, in which nearly all patients completed the full dosing schedule without interruption. A researcher analyzing the results concluded that the drug had provided little meaningful relief to patients, pointing to data showing that the average reduction in pain scores across the full course of the trial was only modest.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher's conclusion?

(A) Among patients who entered the trial with the highest initial pain scores, average reductions by the end of the study were greater than those observed in patients who began with only mild or moderate pain.

(B) Patients who adhered to the prescribed dosing schedule without interruption reported substantially greater pain reductions than those who missed at least one dose during the trial.

(C) Patients who were given a placebo rather than the drug reported similarly modest reductions in pain scores over the same 12-week period.

(D) Pain score reductions among patients in the trial were negligible during the first eight weeks but accelerated sharply in the final four weeks as the drug reached its full therapeutic concentration in the bloodstream.

(E) The chronic pain condition targeted by the drug is one for which all currently available treatments have historically produced only modest average reductions in standardized pain scores.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT World Cup Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
   1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7399 posts
Verbal Forum Moderator
705 posts