OG12-108 ~~

allygmat7

Although custom prosthetic bone replacements produced through a new computer-aided design process will cost more than twice as much as ordinary replacements, custom replacements should still be cost-effective. Not only will surgery and recovery time be reduced, but custom replacements should last longer, thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays.
Which of the following must be studied in order to evaluate the argument presented above?

A. The amount of time a patient spends in surgery versus the amount of time spent recovering from surgery

B. The amount by which the cost of producing custom replacements has declined with the introduction of the new technique for producing them

C. The degree to which the use of custom replacements is likely to reduce the need for repeat surgery when compared with the use of ordinary replacements

D. The degree to which custom replacements produced with the new technique are more carefully manufactured than are ordinary replacements

E. The amount by which custom replacements produced with the new technique will drop in cost as the production procedures become standardized and applicable on a larger scale

答案是C，虽然排除法可以做出来，但是我觉得答案有点不明白
C中的 repeat surgery 在题目中已经提及了
last longer, thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays———这不就是说明可以避免repeat surgery吗
请NN指教

youngerlee

我认为last longer 和  thereby reducing the need for further hospital stays

指的应该是surgery 后的恢复一类的吧，就是surgery后不是都要住院一段时间的吗？？
我是这么觉得的，LZ你看看

msufcufou

我觉得last longer 就是说那个东西 使用时间长
如果使用时间长，那也就不用花钱第二次手术换那个东西上去啦吧~~~

呵呵我是这样想的~

xiruihuang

OG解释写的是：这个新的东西的成本应该在三个方面优于老的 1. surgery  2. recovery 3. potential repeat hospitalization. C选项说的是第三个方面 repeat surgery的可能性。而且last longer和repeat没有必然联系，可能是因为装进去不合适导致的，举个例子。所以last longer不能保证一定不会repeat surgery。
不知道说的明白不？有错误请指正

echo19872010

原题的论点是新方法比旧方法更加便宜，但是它又给出了新技术安装成本是旧技术的两倍的矛盾，因此要得到结论，必须得证明新方法在后续的重复手术上比旧方法要省得多。如果新方法只比旧方法在重复手术上只好一点点，就无法证明新方法比旧方法更加便宜

Fadaways

我不太明白B的意思和解释

tingting520

我觉得lz说的是对的，两者表达的就是一个意思。
新方法优势在于手术时间短，恢复快，并且部件更换频率低；
老方法的优势在于便宜。

但是这个性价比没办法定量算出来，所以需要进一步提供频率有多低的程度。
如老方法一次1000，3年更换；新方法一次2500，10年更换，一定要有这个频率的比较才能算出来“性价比”。

zcooles

简单来说，我认为
cost-effictive可以理解为性价比高
新的方法的优势是检查和复原时间短，同时做好了以后可以维持的时间长
旧的方法就是便宜
那么对于c来说，就是进一步对新旧方法的质量进行说明

不知道可以让大家理解不~