Question ID:PT12 S4 Q18 Passage:Two alternative drugs are available to prevent blood clots from developing after a heart attack. According to two major studies, drug Y does this no more effectively than the more expensive drug Z, but drug Z is either no more or only slightly more effective than drug Y. Drug Z’s manufacturer, which has engaged in questionable marketing practices such as offering stock options to doctors who participate in clinical trials of drug Z, does not contest the results of the studies but claims that they do not reveal drug Z’s advantages. However, since drug Z does not clearly treat the problem more effectively than drug Y, there is no established medical reason for doctors to use drug Z rather than drug Y on their heart-attack victims. Stem:Which one of the following principles, if established, would most help to justify a doctor’s decision to use drug Z rather than drug Y when treating a patient? Correct Answer Choice:EChoice A:Only patients to whom the cost of an expensive treatment will not be a financial hardship should receive that treatment rather than a less expensive alternative one. Choice B:Doctors who are willing to assist in research on the relative effectiveness of drugs by participating in clinical trials deserve fair remuneration for that participation. Choice C:The decision to use a particular drug when treating a patient should not be influenced by the marketing practices employed by the company manufacturing that drug. Choice D:A drug company’s criticism of studies of its product that do not report favorably on that product is unavoidably biased and therefore invalid. Choice E:Where alternative treatments exist and there is a chance that one is more effective than the other, the possibly more effective one should be employed, regardless of cost.