Reading comp PrepTest 147 · Section 3 · Question 18

Incorrect. (Lines 33-36) The Author does believe that a less strict version of equipoise should be developed. However, first, this answer doesn't say that! It instead focuses on the problems with theoretical equipoise, not the advocacy for an alternative. And, second, the ethical requirement itself isn't jeopardized—rather, the ethical practice of clinical trials is jeopardized!

Incorrect. (Lines 29-32) The passage suggests that theoretical equipoise should shut down trials more frequently, but there's no sign that it actually does. The volume of output isn't discussed in the passage in anything other than hypothetical terms, so this answer is incorrect. It also doesn't say that a less restrictive ethical requirement should be adopted! This answer would make sense in a descriptive passage that looked at output under different ethics regimes.

Incorrect. (Lines 50-53) This answer brings up an implication of the adoption of clinical equipoise, but the main point was that that version of equipoise should be adopted—not that it would allow for this situation to be ethical.

Correct. Question Type:
Main Point

Strategy Overview:
Reiterate the main point of the passage as we summarized it after reading

Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
Weird! A Main Point question as the fifth question in a passage? Whatever—let's roll with it.

The Author spends Paragraph 1 highlighting an ethical problem in clinical trials and how it's traditionally addressed. In Paragraph 2, she highlights why that traditional solution (theoretical equipoise) is problematic, before posing a new conception of equipoise that "should be developed" to address these problems.

From this, we said that the main point of the passage was:

Unlike "theoretical equipoise" which is impossible in practice, "clinical equipoise" allows for clinicians to ethically engage in clinical trials despite having a preference for one treatment over another, as long as they recognize a good faith argument from doctors who believe the other treatment is better.

Let's find an answer lining up with that.

Answer Explanation:
(Line 17; Lines 20-21; Lines 33-36) Should statements tend to be main points, and we get one in Lines 33-36. There, it's stated that clinical equipoise should be adopted. Why? Because it's not unreasonably restrictive, as theoretical equipoise is, but it still imposes rigorous ethical standards. This answer reflects the reasoning, the rationale, and the opposing viewpoint, so it's the perfect main point answer.

Key Takeaway:
Should statements generally reflect the main point—even if just a portion of it. Pay particular attention to ones put forward by the Author in an RC passage.

Incorrect. (Lines 33-36) Hello? Clinical equipoise? Anyone? Anyone? This answer completely fails to mention the type of equipoise the Author advocates developing and adopting, so it can't be the main point of the passage.