OG12-105请求解惑

sjmdlycs

Line    Frazier and Mosteller assert that medical
research could be improved by a move toward
larger, simpler clinical trials of medical treatments.
Currently, researchers collect far more background
(5)information on patients than is strictly required for
their trials—substantially more than hospitals
collect—thereby escalating costs of data
collection, storage, and analysis. Although limiting
information collection could increase the risk that
(10)researchers will overlook facts relevant to a study,
Frazier and Mosteller contend that such risk, never
entirely eliminable from research, would still be
small in most studies. Only in research on entirely
new treatments are new and unexpected variables
(15)likely to arise.

Frazier and Mosteller propose not only that
researchers limit data collection on individual
patients but also that researchers enroll more
patients in clinical trials, thereby obtaining a more
(20)representative sample of the total population with
the disease under study. Often researchers restrict
study participation to patients who have no
ailments besides those being studied. A treatment
judged successful under these ideal conditions can
(25)then be evaluated under normal conditions.
Broadening the range of trial participants, Frazier
and Mosteller suggest, would enable researchers to
evaluate a treatment’s effi cacy for diverse patients
under various conditions and to evaluate its
(30)effectiveness for different patient subgroups. For
example, the value of a treatment for a progressive
disease may vary according to a patient’s stage of
disease. Patients’ ages may also affect a
treatment’s efficacy.

105.  It can be inferred from the passage that a study
limited to patients like those mentioned in lines 21–23
would have which of the following advantages over the
kind of study proposed by Frazier and Mosteller?
(A)  It would yield more data and its fi ndings would
be more accurate.
(B)  It would cost less in the long term, though it
would be more expensive in its initial stages.
(C)  It would limit the number of variables
researchers would need to consider when
evaluating the treatment under study.
(D)  It would help researchers to identify subgroups
of patients with secondary conditions that might
also be treatable.
(E)  It would enable researchers to assess the value
of an experimental treatment for the average
patient.

正确答案是C，
我想问的是为什么E不对，文章line23-25说到："can then be evaluated under normal conditions"，不就是表明这个study最终可以assess the value of an experimental treatment for the average patient?
请求解惑，谢谢！

georgina1107

我也选了E。。。。求解

JoshwuS

我觉得楼主是看错题了，要不就是文章大意没弄明白。
F和M有两个建议：1，是认为传统的对于病人背景的收集过于系统，浪费人力财力，所以建议减少背景信息收集。2，是建议扩大病人的样本容量，即扩大病人样本的数量。
原文是这么说的：
Broadening the range of trial participants, Frazier
and Mosteller suggest, would enable researchers to
evaluate a treatment’s effi cacy for diverse patients
under various conditions and to evaluate its
effectiveness for different patient subgroups.
即扩大样本容量可以让研究者更有效地评估治疗，这是你选的那个选项。
而题目问的是，传统的限制病人数量的方法有什么优势，注意区别于引用文的扩大样本容量的好处，那当然就是可以减少要研究的量啦。