A GOOD CR

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1083
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:38 pm
Thanked: 127 times
Followed by:14 members

A GOOD CR

by gmat_perfect » Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:55 am
A major health insurance company in Lagolia pays for special procedures prescribed by physicians only if the procedure is first approved as "medically necessary" by a company-appointed review panel. The rule is intended to save the company the money it might otherwise spend on medically unnecessary procedures. The company has recently announced that in order to reduce its costs, it will abandon this rule.
Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest justification for the company's decision?
A. Patients often register dissatisfaction with physicians who prescribe nothing for their ailments.
B. Physicians often prescribe special procedures that are helpful but not altogether necessary for the health of the patient.
C. The review process is expensive and practically always results in approval of the prescribed procedure.
D. The company's review process does not interfere with the prerogative of physicians, in cases where more than one effective procedure is available, to select the one they personally prefer.
E. The number of members of the company-appointed review panel who review a given procedure depends on the cost of the procedure.

OA: C

What are errors in the wrong options?

Thanks

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1031
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:23 pm
Location: Malibu, CA
Thanked: 716 times
Followed by:255 members
GMAT Score:750

by Brian@VeritasPrep » Mon Oct 18, 2010 3:46 pm
Hey gmat_perfect:

I love this question as an example of what I consider to be one of the most helpful rules of thumb on the GMAT overall:

With CR strengthen/weaken question, 90% of the battle is identifying the conclusion.

Here, the conclusion really has two facets, as this is a strategy/plan type strengthen question. Their plan is:

To cut costs (their goal) they will abandon the "only medically necessary" policy.

What would strengthen that? Something that demonstrates that the policy is too costly to keep in place.

A: Has nothing to do with costs or with the policy - out of scope
B: Doesn't deal with costs even though it talks about some procedures that are "not medically necessary". B could be correct if it added something like "...and these special procedures often preempt several expensive procedures that would otherwise be necessary in the future".
C: CORRECT. By showing that maintaining this process is expensive, we can justify that removing it will cut costs.
D: Out of scope - it somewhat defends keeping the policy (which would weaken the decision and therefore be wrong) but even at that doesn't talk about costs.
E: Out of scope - it mentions cost but doesn't talk about whether the review process is costly or relatively cheap. E tries to trap you by mentioning cost, but it's really out of scope.


The single most important thing to do on a strengthen, weaken, or paradox question is to identify and understand the conclusion (or paradox), so make sure that you're spending that extra few seconds to get that down before you look at the answer choices.
Brian Galvin
GMAT Instructor
Chief Academic Officer
Veritas Prep

Looking for GMAT practice questions? Try out the Veritas Prep Question Bank. Learn More.