4月GMAT作文機(jī)經(jīng)：大學(xué)醫(yī)院比其他類型醫(yī)院差.

　　4月5日GMAT換庫后，小編為大家收集整理4月份的GMAT作文機(jī)經(jīng)，這篇是關(guān)于大學(xué)醫(yī)院比其他類型醫(yī)院差的文章，分享給大家，希望對(duì)大家有所幫助，僅供參考。

　　【原始】

　　作文題目，是說討論大學(xué)醫(yī)院和公立醫(yī)院。文章說的是大學(xué)醫(yī)院沒有公立醫(yī)院好。因?yàn)榇髮W(xué)醫(yī)院醫(yī)生和患者比例低收入少，還有說大學(xué)醫(yī)生要教學(xué)，研究還有訓(xùn)練什么忘記了。本人英語很爛能記得就是這些。

　　【原題】

　　OG43(同11月JJ 7)

　　The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper:

　　“There is a common misconception that university hospitals are better than community or private hospitals. This notion is unfounded, however: the university hospitals in our region employ 15 percent fewer doctors, have a 20 percent lower success rate in treating patients, make far less overall profit, and pay their medical staff considerably less than do private hospitals. Furthermore, many doctors at university hospitals typically divide their time among teaching, conducting research, and treating patients. From this it seems clear that the quality of care at university hospitals is lower than that at other kinds of hospitals.”

　　Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

　　【譯文】

一直以來有一個(gè)共同的誤解：大學(xué)醫(yī)院要好于社區(qū)醫(yī)院和私立醫(yī)院。這個(gè)結(jié)論是毫無根據(jù)的--在我們地區(qū)的的大學(xué)醫(yī)院里，醫(yī)生(比私立醫(yī)院)要少15%，病人的治愈率要低20%，而總利潤也要少得多，而且醫(yī)務(wù)人員的工資也相對(duì)比私立醫(yī)院要低。此外，大學(xué)醫(yī)院的醫(yī)生需要把時(shí)間分配給教學(xué)、研究和治療病人;顯而易見，大學(xué)醫(yī)院的護(hù)理質(zhì)量低于其他類型的醫(yī)院

　　【參考思路】

　　1、樣本不足Insufficient sample

　　1作者提到的醫(yī)院位于“我們地區(qū)”(in our region)，不具有代表性

　　2從一個(gè)醫(yī)院的情況就推導(dǎo)到整個(gè)太草率,one example is logically unsound to establish a general conclusion.

　　2、無根據(jù)假設(shè)Gratuitous assumption：雖然學(xué)校醫(yī)生要上課，做研究，照顧病人，同時(shí)工資少，并不一定導(dǎo)致quality of care比其他醫(yī)院低，也許大學(xué)醫(yī)院的醫(yī)生的醫(yī)術(shù)更高，醫(yī)療設(shè)施更好。

　　3、survey is doubtful——可疑調(diào)查：數(shù)據(jù)取得來源可疑，調(diào)查可能不夠公正客觀

　　4、Casual-relationship——有他因：治愈率低不能說明大學(xué)醫(yī)院的quality of care就低，可能是由于得普通疾病的病人往往選擇社區(qū)醫(yī)院，而去大學(xué)醫(yī)院的病人一般得的都比較罕見難以治愈的疾病

　　【參考范文】

　　In this argument the author concludes that university hospitals provide no better care than private or community hospitals. The author bases this conclusion on the following claims about university hospitals: the ones in this region employ 15 percent fewer doctors; they have a 20 percent lower success rate in treating patients; they pay their staffs less money; they make less profit than community hospitals; and they utilize doctors who divide their time between teaching, research and treating patients. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons.

　　The most egregious reasoning error in the argument is the author’s use of evidence pertaining to university hospitals in this region as the basis for a generalization about all university hospitals. The underlying assumption operative in this inference is that university hospitals in this region are representative of all university hospitals. No evidence is offered to support this gratuitous assumption.

　　Secondly, the only relevant reason offered in support of the claim that the quality of care is lower in university hospitals than it is at other hospitals is the fact that university hospitals have a lower success rate in treating patients. But this reason is not sufficient to reach the conclusion in question unless it can be shown that the patients treated in both types of hospitals suffered from similar types of maladies. For example, if university hospitals routinely treat patients suffering from rare diseases whereas other hospitals treat only those who suffer from known diseases and illnesses, the difference in success rates would not be indicative of the quality of care received.

　　Finally, the author assumes that the number of doctors a hospital employs, its success rate in treating patients, the amount it pays its staff, and the profits it earns are all reliable indicators of the quality of care it delivers. No evidence is offered to support this assumption nor is it obvious that any of these factors is linked to the quality of care delivered to patients. Moreover, the fact that doctors in university hospitals divide their time among many tasks fails to demonstrate that they do a poorer job of treating patients than doctors at other kinds of hospitals. In fact, it is highly likely that they do a better job because they are more knowledgeable than other doctors due to their teaching and research.

　　In conclusion, the author’s argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to demonstrate that university hospitals in this region are representative of all university hospitals, as well as establishing a causal link between the various factors cited and the quality of care delivered to patients.

　　以上就是關(guān)于大學(xué)醫(yī)院比其他類型醫(yī)院差的GMAT作文機(jī)經(jīng)的全部內(nèi)容，考生朋友可以有選擇的看看，最后需要提醒各位的是，機(jī)經(jīng)雖然會(huì)對(duì)我們解題有所幫助，但是在考場中即使題目很像也要避免秒選，最后祝大家都能考出好成績。