What is the difference between "equipoise" and "clinical equipoise"?
I'm confused with the last paragraph and the sentence in the end of the second paragraph...
Could you give us some maps of the passage?
Very short, I thought it is
P1 Old thought
P2 How it is bad
P3 How should we do it now
P4 The good point of clinical equipoise?
LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- ganbayou
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 213
- Joined: June 13th, 2015
-
- ohthatpatrick
-
Thanks Received: 3808
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 4661
- Joined: April 01st, 2011
- This post thanked 1 time.
Re: Passage Discussion
Scale
Typical concept of equipoise (theoretical) vs. author's sense of equipoise (clinical)
Author's VP/Purpose
To Solve a Problem
Important Lines (usually Author's view)
Line 33-36 is the closest thing to a thesis. The author spends the first couple paragraphs introducing the idea of equipoise and describing why theoretical equipoise is too strict a standard. Then she pivots to suggesting an alternative standard that would better accomplish our varied interests. Line 8 gives us a classic warning sign: "Traditionally, MOST X's have been Y." Normally an author would use this language right before pushing back with some "but/yet/however/recently" pivot into the main focus. Here the pivot is on line 15, "unfortunately, the traditional concept of equipoise may be too strict".
Paragraph 1
Introduction to equipoise and its context in studying new drugs.
Paragraph 2
Description of problem with typical (theoretical) definition of equipoise.
Paragraph 3
Description of author's solution to problem (clinical equipoise)
Paragraph 4
Justification for why author's solution is appropriate.
Takeaway/Pattern: Not the worst, structurally. It follows the typical path of laying out background / third person points of view before pivoting into the author. Here, instead of getting the author in the last sentence of the 1st paragraph, it came as the first sentence of the 2nd paragraph. With a pivot like "unfortunately", we know the author is describing something problematic. We should then read with an agenda of seeing whether the author suggests some corrective.
More tricky is understanding the nuance between theoretical and clinical equipoise:
Theoretical equipoise means that a medical researcher testing New drug vs. Old drug must believe that both drugs are equally good.
Clinical equipoise means that a medical researcher testing New drug vs. Old drug must simply believe that there is NOT a clear consensus among the medical community about which drug is better.
#officialexplanation
Typical concept of equipoise (theoretical) vs. author's sense of equipoise (clinical)
Author's VP/Purpose
To Solve a Problem
Important Lines (usually Author's view)
Line 33-36 is the closest thing to a thesis. The author spends the first couple paragraphs introducing the idea of equipoise and describing why theoretical equipoise is too strict a standard. Then she pivots to suggesting an alternative standard that would better accomplish our varied interests. Line 8 gives us a classic warning sign: "Traditionally, MOST X's have been Y." Normally an author would use this language right before pushing back with some "but/yet/however/recently" pivot into the main focus. Here the pivot is on line 15, "unfortunately, the traditional concept of equipoise may be too strict".
Paragraph 1
Introduction to equipoise and its context in studying new drugs.
Paragraph 2
Description of problem with typical (theoretical) definition of equipoise.
Paragraph 3
Description of author's solution to problem (clinical equipoise)
Paragraph 4
Justification for why author's solution is appropriate.
Takeaway/Pattern: Not the worst, structurally. It follows the typical path of laying out background / third person points of view before pivoting into the author. Here, instead of getting the author in the last sentence of the 1st paragraph, it came as the first sentence of the 2nd paragraph. With a pivot like "unfortunately", we know the author is describing something problematic. We should then read with an agenda of seeing whether the author suggests some corrective.
More tricky is understanding the nuance between theoretical and clinical equipoise:
Theoretical equipoise means that a medical researcher testing New drug vs. Old drug must believe that both drugs are equally good.
Clinical equipoise means that a medical researcher testing New drug vs. Old drug must simply believe that there is NOT a clear consensus among the medical community about which drug is better.
#officialexplanation
2 posts Page 1 of 1