As many as 98,000 people die each year due to medical error. In a camp

Question

As many as 98,000 people die each year due to medical error. In a campaign to reduce lethal errors, thousands of hospitals introduced six key changes, including rapid-response teams, re-checks of patient medication, and new guidelines for preventing infection. The campaign estimated that, over an 18-month period, more than 100,000 lives were saved as a direct result of the program.

Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the above statements?

A. Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.

B. The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.

C. In the future, no one will die because of medical error.

D. If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month period due to medical error.

E. The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future.

Main CR Qs link - Main link - https://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-qs-600-700 ... 31508.html

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The argument presents data about deaths due to medical errors. A campaign designed to reduce these deaths due to lethal errors does indeed reduce the number of deaths over an 18-month period. No conclusion is presented in the body of the argument; in fact, the question asks us to "infer" or draw a conclusion from the given statements. The conclusion, therefore, will be found in the answer choices; our task is to find a statement that follows directly from the given statements without introducing any new information or assumptions.

(A) While this might generally be true in the real world, the given information does not address whether doctors and nurses are too careless in conducting their jobs.

(B) While the campaign did save a large number of people, we cannot say that every single person who would have died was saved; this answer choice is too extreme.

(C) The argument does not provide information to make predictions about the future; in addition, this answer choice is extreme. Common sense tells us that we cannot prevent every single medical error in the future.

(D) CORRECT.  This statement can be inferred from the original argument. If the campaign saved the lives of people who otherwise would have died of medical error, then the absence of the campaign would have meant that many of those people might not have been saved. Notice that this answer choice is more of a restatement of the given information, rather than what we would consider a true conclusion in the real world; this is typical of correct answer choices on GMAT inference questions.

(E) While this sounds like a good idea, given the evidence, the argument does not provide information to make predictions about the future.

jaiswalamrita · Answer

A) Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.
 b) The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in
that time period - "All" is stringent, get rid of it 
 c) In the future, no one will die because of medical error - "No" is stringent, get rid of it 
d) If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died
during the 18-month period due to medical error.
 e) The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future - We dont know whether it'll continue, get rid of it

Between A and D we cant say for sure if doctors and nurses were not careful..moreover "should be more careful" indicate as if fatalities arose as a result of carelessness only..we are not sure for this as well.

Left with D - it rightly says that 100,000 might have died" which is mild in its tone, and hence the answer.

HTH

sanket1991 · Answer

As many as 98,000 people die each year due to medical error. In a campaign to reduce lethal errors, thousands of hospitals introduced six key changes, including rapid-response teams, re-checks of patient medication, and new guidelines for preventing infection. The campaign estimated that, over an 18-month period, more than 100,000 lives were saved as a direct result of the program.

A. Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.
 What if error was not caused by doctors and nurses But patients (in taking doses) etc.

B. The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.
 Seems Right

C. In the future, no one will die because of medical error.
 Can't Predict

D. If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month period due to medical error.
 Not necessarily

E. The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future.
 They can be improved or new steps better than these can be implemented. You never know.

mridupawandas · Answer

A,C< E are out of question as they deal with other issues or are extremes remaining B and D B seems possible.. problem with D is that it is telling specifically about 18 months what if the patients would have died due to some other reason in those 18 months despite taking precautions...hence B seems more apt.. My take.

sheolokesh · Answer

D is my take,

A. Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.--No. Medical error can also be caused in patient's negligence.(Initially I thought it could be a contender, but now)

B. The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.
This could not be said. "All people"? In 1 year if it is 98,000, in 18 months it could be 1,47,000. So saved were 1,00,000 only. and other 47,000? Also what if atleast 1 who survived would have had no medical error during his medication?

C. In the future, no one will die because of medical error.--> No evidence.

D. If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month period due to medical error.---> As I explained in B, if this campaign is not implemented, 1,47,000 would have died.

E. The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future. --> No evidence.

chetan2u · Answer

hi,
 B can not be the answer.
 because B is talking of a time period of 18 months that is 1 and a half year... and question stem talks of one year
 that is in one year 98000, so if you take average 98000(1yr)+49000(1/2 year)=147000, out of which only 100000 are saved.. so B does not tell the correct picture..
hope it made sense..

chetan2u · Answer

hi mridupawan..
 there is  a shift in number of year talked of one year in question stem to 1 and 1/2 year in choice B ....
Be careful on these shifts..
Now for answer

A. Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.
 there various improvement due to which lifes have been saved so we cannot say negligence was the reason

B. The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.
 Subtle shift in number of years.. one year in question stem to 1 and 1/2 yr in this inference.

C. In the future, no one will die because of medical error.
 this is too extreme a sentence and cannot be inferred

D. If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month period due to medical error.
 It is clearly given that more than 100000 lives were saved so it can be clearly inferred that had it been not for the campaign, these lives would have been lost.. correct

E. The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future.
 again a very extreme sentence.. there may still be even better and more useful changes deviced in future..

sanket1991 · Answer

The maths part....I should have read more carefully, But the timer ticks

AryamaDuttaSaikia · Answer

This is an inference question. So we have to find out what must be true from the given statements. For example- If I make a statement that " It has been raining since the last three days". The inference would be "The last three days have not been dry". The goal here is to reduce lethal errors. Doing so 100,000 lives would be saved during an 18 month period. So the only statement that can be inferred is mentioned in answer choice "D". As for your question, this is CR - a different section; hence do not apply the SC rules here.

PrafulLata · Answer

As many as 98,000 people die each year due to medical error. In a campaign to reduce lethal errors, thousands of hospitals introduced six key changes, including rapid-response teams, re-checks of patient medication, and new guidelines for preventing infection. The campaign estimated that, over an 18-month period, more than 100,000 lives were saved as a direct result of the program.

Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the above statements?

Here X nos die a year - Bcoz Med Err
 Introduced Y
 Bcoz of Y save in 18 month
 
A. Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.   WRONG   -  Doc & nurses have nothing to do with results as nothing was mentioned about their abilities.

B. The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.   WRONG   -  As 96K die a year and with the help of Y 100K were saved within span of 1.5 Years. That means still some might have died.

C. In the future, no one will die because of medical error.   WRONG  -  As per given facts, still, after introducing Y, few were died.

D. If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month period due to medical error.   CORRECT.

E. The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future.   WRONG   -  Illogical.

Sneha2021 · Answer

KarishmaB   GMATNinja

Why B is incorrect?

• The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period. - the campaign saved 100000 lives who would have died due to medical error - why cant we infer that from below statements.

the campaign estimated more than 100,000 lives were saved as a direct result of the program -

KarishmaB · Answer

It didn't. 98k people die EVERY YEAR. The campaign saved 100k over 18 months. It is likely that given the figures, around 150k people die in 18 months due to medical error. The campaign saved more than 100k. This doesn't mean that it saved ALL. 
Hence B is not correct.

agrasan · Answer

Hi  KarishmaB

If the argument was that 98k people die in  EVERY 18 MONTHS , then (B) would have been correct, right?
I asked this question because I only missed (B) due to mismatch in timeline (year vs. 18 months).

AbhishekP220108 · Answer

Hi  agrasan  No even if it was mentioned 98000 people die in every 18 month B would not have been correct. The problem with B is "All", even though as per argument more than 100000 saved we dont know with absolute surity that all 98000 are in that group. Secondly if it had been given 98000 in every 18 month then data of saving 100000 will also be contradictory.

Hope this helps

guddo · Answer

As many as 98,000 people die each year due to medical error. In a campaign to reduce lethal errors, thousands of hospitals introduced six key changes, including rapid-response teams, re-checks of patient medication, and new guidelines for preventing infection. The campaign estimated that, over an 18-month period, more than 100,000 lives were saved as a direct result of the program.
 
 Which of the following can be most properly inferred from the above statements?

The passage says the campaign estimated that more than 100,000 lives were saved as a direct result of the program. So the safest inference is that, without the program, those people  might have died .  We cannot infer anything stronger , such as that all medical-error deaths were prevented.

A. Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.

Wrong. This is a recommendation, not an inference directly supported by the passage.

B. The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.

Wrong. Too strong. The passage says more than 100,000 lives were saved, not that every possible death was prevented.

C. In the future, no one will die because of medical error.

Wrong. Far too strong. The passage gives no guarantee about the future.

D. If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month period due to medical error.

Correct. If more than 100,000 lives were saved as a direct result of the program, then without the program, more than 100,000 people might have died during that period.

E. The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future.

Wrong. The passage says the changes were introduced, but it does not say they will continue.

Answer: (D)

KarishmaB · Answer

Exactly what AbhishekP220108 said above.

As many as 98,000 people die each year due to medical error. In a camp

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

As many as 98,000 people die each year due to medical error. In a camp

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards