Critical Thinking and Problem Solving Flashcards

A new hospital policy reduces patient waiting times by 20% but increases administrative costs by 15%. Which conclusion is best supported?

Answer: The policy improves patient flow but has a financial trade-off

The evidence shows both a clinical benefit (reduced wait times) and a financial cost (higher admin costs), supporting a nuanced conclusion.

A study concludes that doctors who drink coffee make fewer errors. Which of the following is the strongest alternative explanation?

Answer: Doctors who drink coffee are more alert due to better sleep, not the coffee itself

A confounding variable — such as better sleep rather than coffee itself — could explain the association, making it a strong alternative explanation.

Which of the following best describes an assumption underlying the argument: 'We should increase GP numbers because long appointment wait times cause poor health outcomes'?

Answer: More GPs will reduce wait times

The argument assumes that increasing GP numbers will actually reduce wait times — this is an unstated premise on which the conclusion depends.

A hospital administrator argues: 'Patient satisfaction scores are high, so our care quality must be excellent.' Which flaw weakens this argument most?

Answer: Satisfaction and clinical quality are not the same thing

Patient satisfaction measures perceptions and experience, which may not correlate with objective clinical quality, making this a flawed equivalence.

A junior doctor must choose between two patients for the one remaining ICU bed. Patient A has a better prognosis; Patient B has been waiting longer. Which ethical framework primarily supports prioritising Patient A?

Answer: Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism focuses on maximising overall welfare or benefit, which is best served by prioritising the patient with the better prognosis.

In an argument, which of the following is an example of a logical fallacy known as 'post hoc ergo propter hoc'?

Answer: Infection rates fell after introducing hand hygiene training; therefore training caused the fall

'Post hoc ergo propter hoc' is the fallacy of assuming that because B followed A, A caused B — correlation in time is mistaken for causation.