Deductive Reasoning Application Flashcards
6 cards from real HSRT practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 6 Deductive Reasoning Application flashcards as text
A hospital policy states: 'All adverse drug events must be reported to the pharmacy within 2 hours.' A nurse observes an adverse drug event at 3:00 PM. What deductive conclusion follows?
Answer: The nurse must report the adverse event to the pharmacy by 5:00 PM
Applying the universal policy to the specific time: event at 3:00 PM + 2-hour window = report by 5:00 PM.
The following argument is presented: 'No critically ill patient should be transferred without continuous monitoring. This patient is critically ill. Therefore, this patient should not be transferred without continuous monitoring.' This argument is:
Answer: Deductively valid — the conclusion necessarily follows from the universal prohibition applied to the specific case
A universal negative premise ('No A does B') applied to a specific case ('X is A') validly yields 'X does not do B.' The argument is deductively valid.
A medical student argues: 'Patients who are febrile require investigation. This patient is not febrile. Therefore, this patient does not require investigation.' This reasoning commits which deductive error?
Answer: Denying the antecedent — an invalid argument form that does not deductively follow
Denying the antecedent (If P then Q; not P; therefore not Q) is an invalid deductive form. Many afebrile patients still require investigation.
A clinical pharmacist knows: 'Any patient with a GFR below 30 mL/min requires renal dose adjustment for Drug Z.' Patient W has a GFR of 25 mL/min. What is the deductively valid conclusion?
Answer: Patient W requires renal dose adjustment for Drug Z
GFR 25 is below the threshold of 30, so the universal rule applies and dose adjustment is required — this is a deductively certain conclusion.
A respiratory therapist encounters the argument: 'All mechanically ventilated patients require daily sedation interruption trials. Patient Y is mechanically ventilated and has no contraindications. Therefore, Patient Y requires a daily sedation interruption trial.' This argument is BEST described as:
Answer: Deductively sound — both valid in form and (by clinical guideline) true in premises
The argument is valid in form and aligns with evidence-based guidelines (SAT protocol), making it both valid and sound.
A nursing instructor presents this argument to students: 'If a patient's pain score exceeds 7/10, analgesic intervention is indicated. Patient Q's pain score is 8/10. Therefore, analgesic intervention is indicated.' Students are asked to identify the argument's structure. The correct identification is:
Answer: Modus ponens — P implies Q; P is true; therefore Q
The form 'If P then Q; P; therefore Q' is modus ponens, the most basic valid deductive argument form.