ChaseDream

标题: GWD23-1 [打印本页]

作者: 笨笨可可 时间: 2008-7-28 14:59
标题: GWD23-1

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.

这里我不知道E错在哪里？

我觉得E也对的啊，说明数量决定了这个程序的成本呀。。

作者: rnir 时间: 2008-7-29 08:07
这题说来说去是说special procedures prescribed by physicians存在与否的合理性，跟company-appointed review panel一点关系也没有

作者: whywhy131 时间: 2008-8-23 15:24
E中是说在procedure在决定之前会经过company-appointed review panel ，这样他们会把性价比不高的那部分给去除这样反而会减少COST ，

作者: sibylyau 时间: 2009-12-20 21:47
这道题我看得很混乱，里面不是说The rule is intended to save the company the money 后面怎么又说in order to reduce its costs, it will abandon this rule.
那到底这rule是省钱还是不省呀，有谁能够解释一下

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)