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.
According to the passage, which of the following describes a result of the way in which researchers generally conduct clinical trials?
They expend resources on the storage of information likely to be irrelevant to the study they are conducting.
They sometimes compromise the accuracy of their findings by collecting and analyzing more information than is strictly required for their trials.
They avoid the risk of overlooking variables that might affect their findings, even though doing so raises their research costs.
Because they attempt to analyze too much information, they overlook facts that could emerge as relevant to their studies.
In order to approximate the conditions typical of medical treatment, they base their methods of information collection on those used by hospitals.
题目分析:
文章细节题:以下哪个描述了研究员调查临床实验的结果?
选项分析:
A选项:正确。他们在无关信息的储存上花费了资源:FM批评现在的临床实验收集、储存、分析了过多的信息,而这些信息可能是超过实际需求的。
B选项:他们有时候为了准确性,会收集分析超过需要的信息:文章没有提到现在研究员收集的信息的准确性如何。
C选项:他们避免了忽略重要变量的风险,即使这么做会提高他们的研究成本:忽略变量的风险并不可能完全被避免,只是被降低。
D选项:因为他们企图分析过多的信息,他们忽略了和他们研究有关的事实:他们为了不忽略,才去收集很多的信息。
E选项:为了接近诊疗的实际情形,他们用了和医院一样的信息收集方法:原文提到诊所甚至收集了比医院还多的信息。
有一个问题,第一段说正常情况下研究收集了过多信息,第二段又说有过多信息(别的小病)的直接被排除在样本外了,该怎么理解
我觉得应该这么理解吧:第一段讲的是收集的是某一个人群的很多很多background information,之后第二段讲的是,这些人群包括的不够多。前面讲的是研究深度,后一个讲的是研究广度。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论