Premise 1: In a recent ranking of state hospitals, Hospital A received the lowest overall grade based on a patient mortality rate that was nearly twice that of the top-ranked hospital.
Premise 2: . Mortality rates in five departments (cardiology, oncology, surgery, neurology, and neonatology) were used in the comparison.
Conclusion: Clearly, Hospital A provides the lowest quality of care state-wide in these departments.
One reason that the strength of the Patient Advocacy Association's argument cannot be evaluated is that
So we were essentially trying to determine whether the patients that were treated by the hospitals were similar. If the patients who went to hospital A were sicker or death prone, then the rating does not hold good. Also if the top ranked hospitals are screening patients and only treating those patients who are "treatable" then again the ranking would be biased.
Among the options only D addresses the situation. Unfortunately, no other option even comes close. Pretty easy to pick out.
(A) The argument makes no mention of deaths of patients seen by multiple departments.
(B) The Patient Advocacy Association has a reputation as a biased third party that does not always objectively weigh the evidence regarding quality of care.
(C) The Patient Advocacy Association has only cited the mortality rate in five departments of the hospitals.
(D) The Patient Advocacy Association has not included data about the underlying health and severity of illness of the individuals served by each of the hospitals.
(E) The Patient Advocacy Association has not included recent trends in mortality rates by hospital.
