Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs
Practice US Medical PG questions for Hypothetico-deductive reasoning. These multiple choice questions (MCQs) cover important concepts and help you prepare for your exams.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 1: A scientist in Chicago is studying a new blood test to detect Ab to EBV with increased sensitivity and specificity. So far, her best attempt at creating such an exam reached 82% sensitivity and 88% specificity. She is hoping to increase these numbers by at least 2 percent for each value. After several years of work, she believes that she has actually managed to reach a sensitivity and specificity much greater than what she had originally hoped for. She travels to China to begin testing her newest blood test. She finds 2,000 patients who are willing to participate in her study. Of the 2,000 patients, 1,200 of them are known to be infected with EBV. The scientist tests these 1,200 patients' blood and finds that only 120 of them tested negative with her new exam. Of the patients who are known to be EBV-free, only 20 of them tested positive. Given these results, which of the following correlates with the exam's specificity?
- A. 82%
- B. 90%
- C. 84%
- D. 86%
- E. 98% (Correct Answer)
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***98%***
- **Specificity** measures the proportion of **true negatives** among all actual negatives.
- In this case, 800 patients are known to be EBV-free (actual negatives), and 20 of them tested positive (false positives). This means 800 - 20 = 780 tested negative (true negatives). Specificity = (780 / 800) * 100% = **98%**.
*82%*
- This value represents the *original sensitivity* before the scientist’s new attempts to improve the test.
- It does not reflect the *newly calculated specificity* based on the provided data.
*90%*
- This value represents the *newly calculated sensitivity* of the test, not the specificity.
- Out of 1200 EBV-infected patients, 120 tested negative (false negatives), meaning 1080 tested positive (true positives). Sensitivity = (1080 / 1200) * 100% = 90%.
*84%*
- This percentage is not directly derived from the information given for either sensitivity or specificity after the new test results.
- It does not correspond to any of the calculated values for the new test's performance.
*86%*
- This percentage is not directly derived from the information given for either sensitivity or specificity after the new test results.
- It does not correspond to any of the calculated values for the new test's performance.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 2: Two dizygotic twins present to the university clinic because they believe they are being poisoned through the school's cafeteria food. They have brought these concerns up in the past, but no other students or cafeteria staff support this belief. Both of them are average students with strong and weak subject areas as demonstrated by their course grade-books. They have no known medical conditions and are not known to abuse illicit substances. Which statement best describes the condition these patients have?
- A. A trial separation is likely to worsen symptoms.
- B. The disorder is its own disease entity in DSM-5.
- C. Antipsychotic medications are rarely beneficial.
- D. Can affect two or more closely related individuals. (Correct Answer)
- E. Cognitive behavioral therapy is a good first-line.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Can affect two or more closely related individuals.***
- The shared delusional belief in **folie à deux**, also known as **shared psychotic disorder**, typically occurs in two or more people who are closely associated.
- In this case, the **dizygotic twins** sharing the same delusional belief about being poisoned from cafeteria food fits this pattern.
*A trial separation is likely to worsen symptoms.*
- **Separating the individuals** involved in **folie à deux** is often a crucial step in treatment, as it can help break the cycle of shared delusion and allow for individual therapy.
- Separation typically IMPROVES rather than worsens symptoms by removing the reinforcement of the shared delusion.
*The disorder is its own disease entity in DSM-5.*
- In the **DSM-5**, **folie à deux** is no longer considered a separate diagnostic category.
- Instead, it is classified under **Other Specified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder** or **Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder**, with the specific context of shared delusion noted.
*Antipsychotic medications are rarely beneficial.*
- **Antipsychotics** are actually commonly used in treating folie à deux, particularly for the **primary individual** who initially developed the delusion.
- They can be an important component of treatment, often combined with separation and psychotherapy.
*Cognitive behavioral therapy is a good first-line.*
- **Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)** can be beneficial, particularly after separation, to help individuals challenge and reframe their delusional beliefs.
- However, the **first-line intervention** for shared psychotic disorder is **separation of the involved individuals**, followed by individual therapy (which may include CBT) and medication as needed.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 3: A research study is comparing 2 novel tests for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The first is a serum blood test, and the second is a novel PET radiotracer that binds to beta-amyloid plaques. The researchers intend to have one group of patients with AD assessed via the novel blood test, and the other group assessed via the novel PET examination. In comparing these 2 trial subsets, the authors of the study may encounter which type of bias?
- A. Selection bias (Correct Answer)
- B. Confounding bias
- C. Recall bias
- D. Measurement bias
- E. Lead-time bias
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Selection bias***
- This occurs when different patient groups are assigned to different interventions or measurements in a way that creates **systematic differences** between comparison groups.
- In this study, having **separate patient groups** assessed with different diagnostic methods (blood test vs. PET scan) means any differences observed could be due to **differences in the patient populations** rather than differences in test performance.
- To validly compare two diagnostic tests, both tests should ideally be performed on the **same patients** (paired design) or patients should be **randomly assigned** to receive one test or the other, ensuring comparable groups.
- This is a fundamental **study design flaw** that prevents valid comparison of the two diagnostic methods.
*Measurement bias*
- Also called information bias, this occurs when there are systematic errors in how outcomes or exposures are measured.
- While using different measurement tools could introduce measurement variability, the primary issue here is that **different patient populations** are being compared, not just different measurement methods on the same population.
- Measurement bias would be more relevant if the same patients were assessed with both methods but one method was systematically misapplied or measured incorrectly.
*Confounding bias*
- This occurs when an extraneous variable is associated with both the exposure and outcome, distorting the observed relationship.
- While patient characteristics could confound results, the fundamental problem is the **study design itself** (separate groups for separate tests), which is selection bias.
*Recall bias*
- This involves systematic differences in how participants remember or report past events, common in **retrospective case-control studies**.
- Not relevant here, as this involves prospective diagnostic testing, not recollection of past exposures.
*Lead-time bias*
- Occurs in screening studies when earlier detection makes survival appear longer without changing disease outcomes.
- Not applicable to this scenario, which focuses on comparing two diagnostic methods in separate patient groups, not on survival or disease progression timing.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 4: A 67-year-old man presents to the emergency department with confusion. The patient is generally healthy, but his wife noticed him becoming progressively more confused as the day went on. The patient is not currently taking any medications and has no recent falls or trauma. His temperature is 102°F (38.9°C), blood pressure is 126/64 mmHg, pulse is 120/min, respirations are 17/min, and oxygen saturation is 98% on room air. Physical exam is notable for a confused man who cannot participate in a neurological exam secondary to his confusion. No symptoms are elicited with flexion of the neck and jolt accentuation of headache is negative. Initial laboratory values are unremarkable and the patient's chest radiograph and urinalysis are within normal limits. An initial CT scan of the head is unremarkable. Which of the following is the best next step in management?
- A. CT angiogram of the head and neck
- B. Vancomycin, ceftriaxone, ampicillin, and dexamethasone
- C. Acyclovir (Correct Answer)
- D. PCR of the cerebrospinal fluid
- E. MRI of the head
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Acyclovir***
- This patient presents with **acute confusion and fever** without an obvious infectious source, negative meningeal signs, and normal initial imaging, highly suggestive of **herpes simplex encephalitis (HSE)**.
- HSE is a **medical emergency** with high mortality (70-80%) if untreated, but mortality drops to 20-30% with early acyclovir therapy.
- **Empiric acyclovir must be started immediately** upon clinical suspicion of HSE, **without waiting for diagnostic confirmation**.
- Standard management includes obtaining CSF for PCR **concurrently** with starting acyclovir, but treatment should never be delayed for diagnostic testing.
- The best next step in **management** is initiating acyclovir; CSF PCR is obtained for confirmation but does not delay treatment.
*PCR of the cerebrospinal fluid*
- **CSF PCR for HSV** is the gold standard **diagnostic test** for HSE with high sensitivity (96%) and specificity (99%).
- While lumbar puncture should be performed to obtain CSF for PCR, this is a **diagnostic step** that should be done **concurrently** with starting acyclovir, not instead of it.
- The question asks for best next step in **management**, not diagnosis—acyclovir therapy takes precedence.
- Delaying acyclovir while awaiting diagnostic confirmation significantly increases morbidity and mortality.
*Vancomycin, ceftriaxone, ampicillin, and dexamethasone*
- This broad-spectrum antibiotic regimen is empiric therapy for **bacterial meningitis** and should be considered in patients with fever and altered mental status.
- However, the **absence of meningeal signs** (negative nuchal rigidity, negative jolt accentuation) makes bacterial meningitis less likely.
- In practice, when HSE is suspected but bacterial meningitis cannot be excluded, both antimicrobial regimens may be initiated empirically, but the primary concern here is HSE given the clinical presentation.
*MRI of the head*
- **MRI with FLAIR sequences** is highly sensitive for HSE and typically shows **temporal lobe involvement** (especially medial temporal lobes).
- However, MRI findings may be **normal early in the disease course** (first 48-72 hours).
- MRI is useful for supporting the diagnosis but should **not delay empiric acyclovir therapy**.
- Obtaining MRI before treatment would be inappropriate given the time-sensitive nature of HSE.
*CT angiogram of the head and neck*
- CT angiography evaluates vascular structures and is indicated for suspected **stroke, aneurysm, or vascular dissection**.
- This patient lacks focal neurological deficits, signs of acute stroke, or vascular risk factors that would prioritize vascular imaging.
- The presentation with fever and diffuse encephalopathy points toward an infectious/inflammatory process rather than a vascular etiology.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 5: A 56-year-old man presents to the family medicine office since he has been having difficulty keeping his blood pressure under control for the past month. He has a significant medical history of hypertension, coronary artery disease, and diabetes mellitus. He has a prescription for losartan, atenolol, and metformin. The blood pressure is 178/100 mm Hg, the heart rate is 92/min, and the respiratory rate is 16/min. The physical examination is positive for a grade II holosystolic murmur at the left sternal border. He also has diminished sensation in his toes. Which of the following statements is the most effective means of communication between the doctor and the patient?
- A. “What is causing your blood pressure to be elevated?” (Correct Answer)
- B. “Have you been taking your medications as prescribed?”
- C. “Would you like us to consider trying a different medication for your blood pressure?”
- D. “You are taking your medications as prescribed, aren’t you?”
- E. “Why are you not taking your medication?”
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***“What is causing your blood pressure to be elevated?”***
- This is an **open-ended question** that encourages the patient to share their perspective, concerns, and potential reasons for the elevated blood pressure, fostering a **patient-centered approach**.
- It allows the physician to understand the patient's individual circumstances, medication adherence, lifestyle factors, or other contributing issues without being judgmental or leading.
*“Have you been taking your medications as prescribed?”*
- This is a **closed-ended question** that primarily elicits a "yes" or "no" answer, providing limited insight into the patient's actual adherence and the underlying reasons for non-adherence.
- While important, phrasing it this way might make the patient feel interrogated or judged, potentially hindering honest communication.
*“Would you like us to consider trying a different medication for your blood pressure?”*
- This question prematurely jumps to a solution without fully understanding the cause of the elevated blood pressure and the patient's perspective.
- It bypasses the crucial step of investigating potential reasons for poor blood pressure control, which could include non-adherence, lifestyle factors, or secondary hypertension, rather than necessarily a medication efficacy issue.
*“You are taking your medications as prescribed, aren’t you?”*
- This is a **leading question** that implies an expectation and can make the patient feel pressured to answer affirmatively, even if they are not consistently taking their medication.
- Such phrasing can create a defensive environment and discourage the patient from openly discussing adherence challenges.
*“Why are you not taking your medication?”*
- This is a **direct and accusatory question** that implies blame and can immediately put the patient on the defensive, making them less likely to be honest or forthcoming about their medication habits.
- It fails to create a supportive or collaborative atmosphere, which is essential for effective patient-physician communication.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 6: You are currently employed as a clinical researcher working on clinical trials of a new drug to be used for the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Currently, you have already determined the safe clinical dose of the drug in a healthy patient. You are in the phase of drug development where the drug is studied in patients with the target disease to determine its efficacy. Which of the following phases is this new drug currently in?
- A. Phase 4
- B. Phase 1
- C. Phase 2 (Correct Answer)
- D. Phase 0
- E. Phase 3
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Phase 2***
- **Phase 2 trials** involve studying the drug in patients with the target disease to assess its **efficacy** and further evaluate safety, typically involving a few hundred patients.
- The question describes a stage after safe dosing in healthy patients (Phase 1) and before large-scale efficacy confirmation (Phase 3), focusing on efficacy in the target population.
*Phase 4*
- **Phase 4 trials** occur **after a drug has been approved** and marketed, monitoring long-term effects, optimal use, and rare side effects in a diverse patient population.
- This phase is conducted post-market approval, whereas the question describes a drug still in development prior to approval.
*Phase 1*
- **Phase 1 trials** primarily focus on determining the **safety and dosage** of a new drug in a **small group of healthy volunteers** (or sometimes patients with advanced disease if the drug is highly toxic).
- The question states that the safe clinical dose in a healthy patient has already been determined, indicating that Phase 1 has been completed.
*Phase 0*
- **Phase 0 trials** are exploratory, very early-stage studies designed to confirm that the drug reaches the target and acts as intended, typically involving a very small number of doses and participants.
- These trials are conducted much earlier in the development process, preceding the determination of safe clinical doses and large-scale efficacy studies.
*Phase 3*
- **Phase 3 trials** are large-scale studies involving hundreds to thousands of patients to confirm **efficacy**, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow the drug to be used safely.
- While Phase 3 does assess efficacy, it follows Phase 2 and is typically conducted on a much larger scale before submitting for regulatory approval.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 7: A regional academic medical center has 10 cases of adenovirus in the span of a week among its ICU patients. A committee is formed to investigate this outbreak. They are tasked with identifying the patients and interviewing the care providers to understand how adenovirus could have been spread from patient to patient. This committee will review charts, talk to the care provider teams, and investigate current patient safety and sanitation measures in the ICU. The goal of the committee is to identify weaknesses in the current system and to put in place a plan to help prevent this sort of outbreak from reoccurring in the future. The committee is most likely using what type of analysis?
- A. Simulation
- B. Root cause analysis (Correct Answer)
- C. Algorithmic analysis
- D. Heuristic analysis
- E. Failure mode and effects analysis
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Root cause analysis***
- The committee's goal is to **identify weaknesses** in the current system and **prevent recurrence**, which aligns perfectly with the principles of **root cause analysis (RCA)**.
- RCA is a structured method for **identifying the underlying causes** of problems or incidents, rather than just addressing symptoms.
*Simulation*
- **Simulation** involves creating a model of a process or system to test different scenarios and predict outcomes.
- While useful for planning, it's not the primary method for investigating an actual past event or identifying causative factors after an outbreak has occurred.
*Algorithmic analysis*
- **Algorithmic analysis** is primarily used in computer science to evaluate the efficiency and complexity of algorithms.
- It does not apply to investigating the spread of infectious diseases or healthcare system failures.
*Heuristic analysis*
- **Heuristic analysis** involves using a rule of thumb or an educated guess to solve a problem quickly and efficiently, especially when perfect solutions are not feasible.
- This approach is less systematic and comprehensive than what is required to thoroughly investigate an outbreak and identify root causes.
*Failure mode and effects analysis*
- **Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA)** is a proactive method used to identify **potential failure modes** in a system and their effects *before* an event occurs.
- The committee is investigating an **already existing problem**, making RCA more appropriate than FMEA, which is used for risk assessment of future processes.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 8: A 77-year-old female comes to a medical school's free clinic for follow-up examination after a urinary tract infection (UTI) and is seen by a fourth year medical student. The clinic serves largely uninsured low-income patients in a New York City neighborhood with a large African American and Latino population. Two weeks ago, the patient was treated in the local emergency department where she presented with altered mental state and dysuria. The medical student had recently read about a study that described a strong relationship between cognitive impairment and UTI hospitalization risk (RR = 1.34, p < 0.001). The attending physician at the medical student's free clinic is also familiar with this study and tells the medical student that the study was conducted in a sample of upper middle class Caucasian patients in the Netherlands. The attending states that the results of the study should be interpreted with caution. Which of the following concerns is most likely underlying the attending physician's remarks?
- A. Confounding bias
- B. Selection bias
- C. Poor reliability
- D. Low internal validity
- E. Low external validity (Correct Answer)
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Low external validity***
- **External validity** refers to the generalizability of study findings to other populations, settings, or times.
- The findings from a study of **upper-middle-class Caucasian patients in the Netherlands** may not apply to low-income African American and Latino patients in New York City due to socioeconomic, genetic, and environmental differences, leading to low external validity.
*Confounding bias*
- **Confounding bias** occurs when an unobserved variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome, distorting their true relationship.
- While confounding can affect internal validity, the attending's concern is specifically about the applicability of the findings to a different population, not the initial study's internal integrity.
*Selection bias*
- **Selection bias** arises when the study participants are not representative of the target population, often leading to systematic differences between groups.
- While the *initial study* might have had its own selection bias if its sample wasn't representative of the Netherlands population, the attending's concern relates to applying its findings to a *different* population.
*Poor reliability*
- **Reliability** refers to the consistency or reproducibility of a measurement or study result over time or across different observers.
- This concern is about the generalizability of the findings to a different population, not whether the initial study's measurements or results were inconsistent.
*Low internal validity*
- **Internal validity** refers to the extent to which a study establishes a cause-and-effect relationship between the intervention/exposure and the outcome within its own sample.
- The attending's concern is not that the study itself was poorly conducted or failed to demonstrate a true association within its *own* population, but rather that its findings may not hold true for *other* populations.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 9: A 53-year-old man presents with a 2-year-history of dull, nonspecific flank pain that subsides with rest. His past medical history is significant for hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. He has no allergies and takes no medications. His father died of kidney disease at the age of 51, and his mother has been treated for ovarian cancer. On presentation, his blood pressure is 168/98 mm Hg, and his heart rate is 102/min. Abdominal examination is significant for palpable bilateral renal masses. His laboratory tests are significant for creatinine of 2.0 mg/dL and a BUN of 22 mg/dL. Which of the following tests is most recommended in this patient?
- A. Chest X-ray
- B. Genetic testing for polycystic kidney disease
- C. CT scan of abdomen and pelvis
- D. 24-hour urine protein collection
- E. Renal ultrasound (Correct Answer)
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Renal ultrasound***
- This patient presents with classic features of **autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD)**: bilateral palpable renal masses, hypertension, elevated creatinine, and a strong family history (father died of kidney disease at 51).
- **Renal ultrasound is the first-line imaging test** for diagnosing ADPKD due to its **non-invasiveness, no radiation exposure, high sensitivity for detecting cysts, and cost-effectiveness**.
- Ultrasound can establish the diagnosis using **established diagnostic criteria** (Pei-Ravine criteria based on age and number of cysts) and is recommended by **KDIGO guidelines** as the initial imaging modality.
- In this patient with clear clinical features and palpable masses, ultrasound will readily confirm the diagnosis by demonstrating multiple bilateral renal cysts.
*24-hour urine protein collection*
- This test quantifies **proteinuria** to assess for glomerular damage.
- While proteinuria can occur in ADPKD, it is not a diagnostic test and would not help identify or characterize the bilateral renal masses in this presentation.
*Chest X-ray*
- A chest X-ray evaluates the **lungs and heart**.
- It provides no diagnostic information regarding renal masses or kidney pathology and is not indicated in this case.
*Genetic testing for polycystic kidney disease*
- **Genetic testing** (for PKD1 or PKD2 mutations) can confirm ADPKD definitively and is useful for family counseling and cases with uncertain imaging findings.
- However, it is **not the first-line test** and is typically performed *after* imaging has established the diagnosis, or in specific situations (e.g., young patients, potential living kidney donors, atypical presentations).
- In this patient with clear clinical and anticipated imaging findings, genetic testing is unnecessary for initial diagnosis.
*CT scan of abdomen and pelvis*
- CT scan provides excellent anatomic detail and is useful in ADPKD for **evaluating complications** such as cyst hemorrhage, infection, suspected malignancy, or for **preoperative planning**.
- However, it is **not the first-line diagnostic test** due to higher cost, radiation exposure, and the fact that ultrasound is equally effective for initial diagnosis.
- CT would be reserved for situations where ultrasound is inconclusive or when complications are suspected.
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG Question 10: A 50-year-old woman presents with severe abdominal pain. Past medical history is significant for a peptic ulcer. Physical examination is limited because the patient will not allow abdominal palpation due to the pain. The attending makes a presumptive diagnosis of peritonitis. Which of the following non-invasive maneuvers would be most helpful in confirming the diagnosis of peritonitis in this patient?
- A. Rectal examination shows guaiac positive stool
- B. Forced cough elicits abdominal pain (Correct Answer)
- C. Hyperactive bowel sounds are heard on auscultation
- D. Bowel sounds are absent on auscultation
- E. Pain is aroused with gentle intensity/pressure at the costovertebral angle
Hypothetico-deductive reasoning Explanation: ***Forced cough elicits abdominal pain***
- A forced cough increases **intra-abdominal pressure**, which in turn stretches the inflamed peritoneum.
- Elicitation of pain with coughing is a highly sensitive and specific sign for **peritoneal irritation** and helps confirm the diagnosis of peritonitis.
*Rectal examination shows guaiac positive stool*
- **Guaiac positive stool** indicates the presence of blood in the stool, which is a sign of gastrointestinal bleeding.
- While a peptic ulcer can cause bleeding, this finding does not directly confirm **peritonitis** or peritoneal inflammation.
*Hyperactive bowel sounds are heard on auscultation*
- **Hyperactive bowel sounds** are often associated with conditions like gastroenteritis or partial bowel obstruction.
- In peritonitis, bowel sounds are typically diminished or absent due to **ileus**, not hyperactive.
*Bowel sounds are absent on auscultation*
- While **absent bowel sounds** can be a sign of peritonitis due to paralytic ileus, this finding is not as specific or immediately helpful as eliciting pain with coughing in confirming the primary diagnosis in a patient already presumed to have peritonitis.
- The absence of bowel sounds can also be seen in other conditions and may take longer to develop consistently.
*Pain is aroused with gentle intensity/pressure at the costovertebral angle*
- Pain at the **costovertebral angle (CVA)** typically indicates inflammation of the kidney or surrounding structures, such as in pyelonephritis.
- This finding is specific to **renal pathology** and not directly related to generalized peritonitis.
More Hypothetico-deductive reasoning US Medical PG questions available in the OnCourse app. Practice MCQs, flashcards, and get detailed explanations.
