帮忙看一道逻辑题

vivian7765

Often patients with ankle fractures that are stable, and thus do not require surgery, are given follow-up x-ray because their orthopedists are concerned about possibly having misjudged the stability of the fracture. When number of follow-up x-rays were reviewed, however, all the fractures that had initially been judged stable were found to have healed correctly. Therefore, it is a waste of money to order follow-up x-rays of ankle fracture initially judged stable.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A)        Doctors who are general practitioners rather than orthopedists are less likely than orthopedists to judge the stability of an ankle fracture correctly.
B)        Many ankle injuries for which an initial x-ray is ordered are revealed by the x-ray not to involve any fracture of the ankle.
C)        X-rays of patients of many different orthopedists working in several hospitals were reviewed.
D)        The healing of ankle fractures that have been surgically repaired is always checked by means of a follow-up x-ray.
E)        Orthopedists routinely order follow-up x-rays for fractures of bone other than ankle bones.

这道题答案是C，搞不懂为什么。

genius_fang

呵呵，我今天也做到这道题目。一开始也没搞懂~现在的理解是：C选项说：这个检查在很多医院做过，也就是说，如果只在一个医院做过，可能是因为当初作出判断的那个医生水平高，检查还是有必要的。现在告诉你，在大大小小医院得出的结论一样，加强了这个检查没有必要的结论！

vivian7765

谢谢

phanly

我的想法和楼上类似
第一，结论是：浪费钱
第二，要加强浪费钱的可能性
如果只有一个医生诊断的话，就有复查的必要性，因为这个医生可能会出错。所以就不是浪费钱了
但，如果好多医生都诊断过的呢？误诊的可能性排除掉了，所以你再去检查一边，就是在浪费钱，加强了结论