Critical Reasoning

Hey i couldn't find out any logic behind the answer to this CR question ..cud anyone help??

Lists of hospitals have been compiled showing which hospitals have patient death rates exceeding the national average. The data have been adjusted to allow for differences in the ages of patients.
Each of the following, if true, provides a good logical ground for hospitals to object to interpreting rank on these lists as one of the indices of the quality of hospital care EXCEPT:
(A) Rank order might indicate insignificant differences, rather than large differences, in numbers of patient deaths.
(B) Hospitals that keep patients longer are likely to have higher death rates than those that discharge patients earlier but do not record deaths of patients at home after discharge.
(C) Patients who are very old on admission to a hospital are less likely than younger patients to survive the same types of illnesses or surgical procedures.
(D) Some hospitals serve a larger proportion of low-income patients, who tend to be more seriously ill when admitted to a hospital.
(E) For-profit hospitals sometimes do not provide intensive-care units and other expensive services for very sick patients but refer or transfer such patients to other hospitals.

i can tell you what the answer is. but it's based on my instincs....
so i cannot provide the explanation you desire.

i expect some other person esp. moderator, captain Eric or any other member to answer to this post

dear moderators,
please pay attention!
you call yourself expert and pundit but do not share your knowledge.

to frozen GMAT & others,
"the concept of rating hospitals on the basis of death rates is baseless"
this is what hospital authourities want to convey.

& what makes this question touhg is that EXCEPT word.

anyway coming to the point....
first of all,

Cut A from the list as it clearly blames rank..and all

further to convey their ( hospitals') message the you will notice that all
other options (B D E) have something to do with hospitals i mean something that hospitals can do about. :


however C is the only option where hospitals cannot do anything about.

every other option shows subtle discrepency in individual hospitals.
they hv divided hospitals vertically.

(just reading few first words of each option B D E you will realise this)
wheras in option C theres no such inconsistancy,,,,,

Therefore statement C is the answer.

PS I CAN PROVIDE MUCH SIMPLE EXPLANATION IF YOU LIKE. 8)

Dear aim-wsc:

I am sorry for not having responded to this sooner. I have been having "technical difficulties" while on my busines travels (read "I was clueless without my IT support staff"). Thanks Eric for saving me from a mob lynch.

My analysis follows in the next email.

Answer is A


Each of the following, if true, provides a good logical ground for hospitals to object to interpreting rank on these lists as one of the indices of the quality

this is what the question is asking. whether or not rank is the right index for interepreting quality of a hospital.

All of the rest provide for a good argument against rank as a indicator of quality except a.

sorry dear
but i disagree.
the answer is C.

just look what Statement A says:
Rank order might indicate insignificant differences, rather than large differences, in numbers of patient deaths.

it clearly points out the flaw made in rank-order system.
i hope you got my point.....
at the same time statement C says nothign about hospitals. but it talks in general terms....
so its on safe side.

this problem already hv given me lots of pain.
so no more.
i think Mr Anurag could explain it in much simple langauge.

Hi everyone:

Here is how I would approach the question:


step 1: Read the question stem: the question is asking to pick the choice that does NOT provide a basis to object using SOME lists (we haven't read the body of the question yet) to measure hospital care quality.

Another way (an easier way) is to eliminate 4 choices that DO provide the basis to question the use of these lists.

Step 2: Read the question body.

premise 1: lists contain hospitals that have higher than average patient death rates.

premise 2: data adjusts for age of patients.

Step 3: think of possible reasons why the lists should not be used. (you may not be able to capture all possible reasons, but the process of thinking about the answers puts you on a fast track to eliminating the incorrect answers)

- majority of the patients treated in hospitals do not die.
- data does not adjust for economic/social/quality of life factors that may influence mortality.
- Data also does not account for what kind of diseases hospitals treat for. Hospitals receiving mostly cancer patients or severe trauma victims may have higher mortality rates.


Step 4: Eliminate, eliminate, eliminate.

A: Hospital that are closely ranked may have large differences in death rates. This one is a tough one to eliminate. Come back to it later.

B: early discharge does not capture patients who die later. So B is a good reason to object. Eliminate B.

C: Data adjusted for age, so not a valid reason to object. Possible answer. Still keep going and come back to it.

D: economic and quality of life issues may affect survival rate. Good reason to object. Eliminate D.

E: Types of patients (seriously ill versus moderately ill) received may be different. Good reason to object. Eliminate E.


Step 5: Choose the correct choice. Looking at A and C (the only choices not eliminated in step 4), A does point out a possible flaw in evaluating ho good a hospital is. It is not a strong basis for objection, but C just can not be a basis for objecting to the lists because the lists are corrected for age variation (as mentioned in the body).

So the correct answer is C.

Body:
Lists of hospitals have been compiled showing which hospitals have patient death rates exceeding the national average. The data have been adjusted to allow for differences in the ages of patients.

Stem:

Each of the following, if true, provides a good logical ground for hospitals to object to interpreting rank on these lists as one of the indices of the quality of hospital care EXCEPT:

Choices

(A) Rank order might indicate insignificant differences, rather than large differences, in numbers of patient deaths.
(B) Hospitals that keep patients longer are likely to have higher death rates than those that discharge patients earlier but do not record deaths of patients at home after discharge.
(C) Patients who are very old on admission to a hospital are less likely than younger patients to survive the same types of illnesses or surgical procedures.
(D) Some hospitals serve a larger proportion of low-income patients, who tend to be more seriously ill when admitted to a hospital.
(E) For-profit hospitals sometimes do not provide intensive-care units and other expensive services for very sick patients but refer or transfer such patients to other hospitals.

I've got it as C

In A i think that "If the Rank order might indicate insignificant differences, rather than large differences", then some hospitals might have insignificant differences in the patients' death rate; however, this will hamper the ranking of the hospital even though it is comparable to the other hospitals. It is good reason to eliminate. Hence C.

Hi,

doesnt the option (A),
Rank order might indicate insignificant differences, rather than large differences, in numbers of patient deaths

mean

hospitals that are ranked farther apart from each other will not have a large difference in the no. of patient deaths?

instead of, as aunrag pointed out,
Hospital that are closely ranked may have large differences in death rates


could someone comment?

well this thread has quite a big history.

and i never thought people find explanation limited/insufficient.

anyway me and Anurag hv been retired from the board ... so i expect someone other with better/ different explanation.

In my opinion C is the best answer in this case.