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 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 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 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 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 then be evaluated under normal conditions. Broadening the range of trial participants, Frazier and Mosteller suggest, would enable researchers to evaluate a treatment's efficacy for diverse patients under various conditions and to evaluate its 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.
The passage is primarily concerned with
identifying two practices in medical research that may affect the accuracy of clinical trials
describing aspects of medical research that tend to drive up costs
evaluating an analysis of certain shortcomings of current medical research practices
describing proposed changes to the ways in which clinical trials are conducted
explaining how medical researchers have traditionally conducted clinical trials and how such trials are likely to change
文章大意:
1. F&M提议:更简单的医疗诊治
原因:现在的研究提取了过多的信息,加剧成本。尽管减少信息提取有风险,但风险很小
2. 提议的具体内容:
a. 减少信息提取。
b. 扩大样本。优点:考虑更多情况,使用于更多病人群体
题目分析:
文章主旨题
选项分析:
A选项:指出两个会影响临床实验准确性的事情:文章没有提。
B选项:描述会增加成本的事儿:文章只在第一段提到了目前的信息提取方法会增加成本,但这不是文章重点。
C选项:评估一个分析,分析对象为现在医疗研究的缺点:文章没有评估FM的分析,只是在介绍FM的提议。
D选项:正确。描述临床实验该如何改变:文章介绍了FM的关于改变诊疗的提议。
E选项:解释临床实验的传统方法以及如何改变:文章没有提到传统诊疗将改变的可能性。
E的意思是,这个实验(自己)以后会怎么变化,但是整篇文章都是这俩人自己提出的propose
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论