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

Redeem

Strunk hospital

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

Strunk hospital

by ssgmatter » Sat May 01, 2010 11:20 pm
Strunk Hospital's much applauded increase in emergency room efficiency due to its new procedures for handling trauma patients does not withstand careful analysis. Strunk Hospital's average time before treatment for all emergency room patients is nearly 40minutes - the highest in the city. And for trauma victims the situation is even worse: the average time before treatment is nearly half an hour - more than twice the city average.

Which of the following, if true, would be most damaging to the conclusion about the value of the new procedures.

A. The cities with the most efficient emergency rooms utilizes the same procedures for handling trauma victims as does Strunk Hospital
B. Because trauma patients account for a large percentage of emergency room patients, procedures that hasten their treatment will likely significantly increase overall emergency room efficiency.
C. After the new procedures went into effect, Strunk's average time before treatment for emergency room patients dropped by 35%
D. Due to differences in localization and size of staff, not all emergency rooms can expected to reach similar levels of efficiency.
E. The recently hired administrators who instituted the new procedures also increased Strunk's emergency room staff by 15%

I chose C but what is the problem with A and B here......Please explain with the reasons....
Best-
Amit
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Sun May 02, 2010 12:31 am
Any thoughts!..

Cheers!
Best-
Amit
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:31 am

by kaushals » Sun May 02, 2010 3:42 am
IMO E.
The conclusion is that the new procedures are quite effective in increasing the efficiency since after applying them the emergency room efficiency has increased.
From E we can infer that since the staff has also increased so the increase in the efficiency may be due to increased staff not not because of new procedures. So this seriously undermines the value of new procedures.

Pls post the OA and OE.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Sun May 02, 2010 4:51 am
with A you are not sure how much time those other hospitals are taking. they might be taking less time, you don't know. Therefore, A is not good.
B is actually giving reason, why it takes long time. This option strengthen the argument. Therefore, B is wrong.
ssgmatter wrote:Strunk Hospital's much applauded increase in emergency room efficiency due to its new procedures for handling trauma patients does not withstand careful analysis. Strunk Hospital's average time before treatment for all emergency room patients is nearly 40minutes - the highest in the city. And for trauma victims the situation is even worse: the average time before treatment is nearly half an hour - more than twice the city average.

Which of the following, if true, would be most damaging to the conclusion about the value of the new procedures.

A. The cities with the most efficient emergency rooms utilizes the same procedures for handling trauma victims as does Strunk Hospital
B. Because trauma patients account for a large percentage of emergency room patients, procedures that hasten their treatment will likely significantly increase overall emergency room efficiency.
C. After the new procedures went into effect, Strunk's average time before treatment for emergency room patients dropped by 35%
D. Due to differences in localization and size of staff, not all emergency rooms can expected to reach similar levels of efficiency.
E. The recently hired administrators who instituted the new procedures also increased Strunk's emergency room staff by 15%

I chose C but what is the problem with A and B here......Please explain with the reasons....
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 539 times
Followed by:164 members
GMAT Score:800

by Testluv » Sun May 02, 2010 3:00 pm
I chose C but what is the problem with A and B here......Please explain with the reasons....
The author argues that the new procedures will not reduce average wait time. Thus, choice C directly weakens the argument, and is correct.

Let's consider choices A and B:
A. The cities with the most efficient emergency rooms utilizes the same procedures for handling trauma victims as does Strunk Hospital
Well, this choice is a bit ambiguous; either it has not been fully transcribed or the source is not great. Assuming that the "same procedures" that the choice refers to is the new procedures that Strunk has adopted, then this choice actually strengthens the argument, rather than weakening it. (Wrong answers to stn questions are often weakeners, and vice-verse).
B. Because trauma patients account for a large percentage of emergency room patients, procedures that hasten their treatment will likely significantly increase overall emergency room efficiency.
Who cares? For all we know the new procedures that Strunk has adopted may directly target this group of patients.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Mon May 03, 2010 7:10 am
Thankyou Testluv for the explanations.

I understood that A strengthen the argument but please elaborate more on option B.... I am still not clear....

Thanks!
Best-
Amit
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 539 times
Followed by:164 members
GMAT Score:800

by Testluv » Mon May 03, 2010 8:08 pm
ssgmatter wrote:Thankyou Testluv for the explanations.

I understood that A strengthen the argument but please elaborate more on option B.... I am still not clear....

Thanks!
Hi Phil,

sorry, but I'm having a bit of trouble figuring out why choice B is tempting you. Could you please elaborate on what about choice B is making it difficult for you to eliminate? Then, I should be able to provide a better explanation on why its wrong.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:01 am
Testluv wrote:
ssgmatter wrote:Thankyou Testluv for the explanations.

I understood that A strengthen the argument but please elaborate more on option B.... I am still not clear....

Thanks!
Hi Phil,

sorry, but I'm having a bit of trouble figuring out why choice B is tempting you. Could you please elaborate on what about choice B is making it difficult for you to eliminate? Then, I should be able to provide a better explanation on why its wrong.
Hi Testluv,

I think B is wrong here because it talks about the emergency rooms in the cities and not the hospitals emergency rooms.....Does it make sense?
Best-
Amit
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:08 am
Testluv wrote:
I chose C but what is the problem with A and B here......Please explain with the reasons....
The author argues that the new procedures will not reduce average wait time. Thus, choice C directly weakens the argument, and is correct.

Let's consider choices A and B:
A. The cities with the most efficient emergency rooms utilizes the same procedures for handling trauma victims as does Strunk Hospital
Well, this choice is a bit ambiguous; either it has not been fully transcribed or the source is not great. Assuming that the "same procedures" that the choice refers to is the new procedures that Strunk has adopted, then this choice actually strengthens the argument, rather than weakening it. (Wrong answers to stn questions are often weakeners, and vice-verse).
B. Because trauma patients account for a large percentage of emergency room patients, procedures that hasten their treatment will likely significantly increase overall emergency room efficiency.
Who cares? For all we know the new procedures that Strunk has adopted may directly target this group of patients.
Also I dont understand how B is strengthening the argument....if other hospitals use the same procedures as used by strunk hospital then in that case how come it strengthen the argument...:(
Best-
Amit
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1