BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

700-800 level CR question

Expert replies
by dhonu121 » Tue May 22, 2012 8:13 am
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?
"¢ Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.
"¢ The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.
"¢ In the future, no one will die because of medical error.
"¢ If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month
period due to medical error.
"¢ The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future.

OA:D
Please don't post what you think is right here. I know the answer.
My question is that: What is wrong with A ?
How do I negate choice A ?
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by ice_rush » Tue May 22, 2012 8:44 am
there is no mention of doctors or nurses in the stimulus. (A) is completely out of scope.

I wouldn't even bother wasting my time to negate (A), but since you asked, this is how i'd negate (A): Doctors and nurses should NOT be more careful when doing their jobs



hope this helps!
Join the discussion

by justharsha » Tue May 22, 2012 9:42 am
The article mentions some of the key changes that were implemented but does not mention negligence or irresponsibility by any of the professions. It mentions 6 key changes that were implemented but there is not enough information to correlate the implemented changes to the results observed. It is not even clear that all these changes were done to tighten up any carelessness on the part of the nurses and doctors. Besides there are only 3 out of the 6 key-changes highlighted. It is possible that the other 3 reasons could be completely administrative(not related to doctors or nurses) that are not mentioned here and could also be significantly contributing to the reduction in the number of casualties.

All we know if that the key changes that were implemented seem to reduce the number of deaths(the root cause is unclear) and hence the key changes are likely to be continued unless proved useless.
Join the discussion

by Gaurav 2013-fall » Fri May 25, 2012 1:44 am
dhonu121 wrote: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?
"¢ Doctors and nurses should be more careful when doing their jobs.
"¢ The campaign saved all of the people who otherwise would have died due to medical error in that time period.
"¢ In the future, no one will die because of medical error.
"¢ If the campaign had not been implemented, more than 100,000 people might have died during the 18-month
period due to medical error.
"¢ The key changes initiated by the campaign will continue to be implemented in the future.

OA:D
Please don't post what you think is right here. I know the answer.
My question is that: What is wrong with A ?
How do I negate choice A ?
Buddy, you should not go out of the bounds of what is stated in the argument. The argument said medical errors killed people. These medical errors may not have been committed by Doctors or Nurses. These errors could have been due to the cleaners at the hospitals, leading to infections etc.
Join the discussion

by jimmyjimmy » Sat May 26, 2012 7:10 am
one tip- always negate the choices which say solid and confirm things,.,. coz here we hv to come up with different possibilities.......
A- can be negated coz "who said all errors were done by doctors and nurses"
C- same above question we can ask..and can negate it...........
D- who said it will continue .. nothing such mentioned....
left with B and D
B- it is stated that more than 10,00,000 lives were saved which means few died....(in the premise)
and B says that it saved everyone, negate it....
left with D....
observe one more thing,.,.
D does not say confirm solid thing,,,,
OBSERVE IT............................
whereas other options say solid thing.......
hope it helps!!..
Join the discussion

by [email protected] » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:10 am
In an Inference question, you have to be very particular on what is actually said in the stimulus. In the stimulus it is said that 'The campaign estimated that, over an 18-month period, more than 100,000
lives were saved as a direct result of the program'.
It is nowhere given in the stimulus that those 100000 people would have died with certainity.

All you can say is that they might or might not have died...

D is the best answer choice.
IT IS TIME TO BEAT THE GMAT

LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!

Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
Join the discussion

by mourinhogmat1 » Wed Jun 20, 2012 10:35 pm
Yeah in inference CR questions. The key is to exactly replicate what is stated in the premise. The only statement which does that is Statement D. The rest are stretches of imagination.
Join the discussion