【单选题】

患者,女,38岁。1小时前被发现昏迷,抽搐、呕吐。查体:多汗、流涎,瞳孔明显缩小,呼吸有大蒜味。分诊护士考虑最可能为()

A.

脑出血

B.

一氧化碳中毒

C.

有机磷中毒

D.

食物中毒

E.

癔病

应得客app下载
手机使用
微信扫一扫
二维码扫一扫
分享
微信内点击右上角“…”即可分享
反馈
收藏
举报
参考答案
参考解析
【单选题】

临床预防服务的对象是

A.
患者和健康人
B.
个体和群体健康人
C.
个体和群体“患者”
D.
个体的健康人和无症状“患者”
E.
个体的典型患者和无症状“患者”
【单选题】

下列关于幼儿一日生活安排的表述,正确的是(    )。

①相对稳定、合理

②能根据幼儿年龄特点、个体差异、活动需要做灵活调整

③根据幼儿兴趣频繁转换

④科学安排,避免幼儿消极等待

A.

①②③④

B.

①②④

C.

②③④

D.

①③④

【单选题】

下列关于输血的叙述,不正确的是 (   )。

A.
AB型血的人为“万能受血者”
B.
O型血的人为“万能供血者”
C.
交叉配血主侧和次侧均阴性者可以输血
D.
输血应少量而且缓慢
E.
若ABO血型系统相符合,不需进行交叉配血
【单选题】

(  )为有关基金业务活动出具法律意见书、审计报告、内部控制评价报告等文件,应当勤勉尽责,对所依据的文件资料内容的真实性、准确性、完整性进行核查和验证。

A.
基金评价机构
B.
基金信息技术服务机构
C.
律师事务所和会计师事务所
D.
基金销售支付机构
【单选题】

In writing,students may not know how to put something into proper English and thus ask their teacher for help.Here the teacher is to play the role of a/an  .

A.
facilitator
B.
assessor
C.
controller
D.
participant
【C型选择题】

患者,女,74岁。以“间断性腹胀1月余”为主诉入院。患者1个月前无明显诱因出现腹胀,既往有乙肝病史14年。诊断:肝硬化失代偿期,腹水(大量)。医嘱如下。螺内酯片20mg 口服,2次/日;注射用还原型谷胱甘肽1200 mg 静脉滴注,1次/日;呋塞米片20mg 口服,1次/日;注射用胸腺肽120 mg 静脉滴注,1次/日。患者联合使用螺内酯和呋塞米的目的是()

A.

预防低钾血症

B.

预防低钠血症

C.

预防低镁血症

D.

预防耳毒性

E.

预防高尿酸血症

【单选题】
安全标签主要是针对危险化学品而设计、向作业人员传递安全信息的一种载体,它用简单、明了、易于理解的文字和图形表述有关化学品的危险特性及安全处置的注意事项,以警示作业人员进行安全操作和使用。下列要素中,位于化学品名称的下方,要求醒目、清晰的是(       )。
A.
信号词
B.
化学品标识
C.
象形图
D.
危险性说明
【单选题】

昆布的功效是( )。

A.
清热滑痰
B.
消痰软坚
C.
燥湿化痰
D.
敛肺平喘
E.
泻肺平喘
【单选题】

以下配伍体现“培土生金”之意的是

A.
麦门冬汤
B.
四君子汤
C.
补中益气汤
D.
健脾丸
E.
归脾汤
【单选题】

Passage1

Today's adults grew up in schools designed to sort us into the various segments of our social and economic system. The amount of time available to learn was fixed: one year per grade. The amount learned by the end of that time was free to vary: some of us learned a great deal;some,very little. As we advanced through the grades,those who had learned a great deal in previous grades continued to build on those foundations. Those who had failed to master the early prerequisites within the allotted time failed to learn that which followed. After 12 or 13 years of cumulative treatment of this kind,we were,in effect,spread along an achievement continuum that was ultimately reflected in each student's rank in class upon graduation.

From the very earliest grades, some students learned a great deal very quickly and consistently scored high on assessments. The emotional effect of this was to help them to see themselves as capable learners, and so these students became increasingly confident in school. That confidence gave them the inner emotional strength to take the risk of striving for more success because they believed that success was within their reach. Driven forward by this optimism, these students continued to try hard, and that effort continued to result in success for them. They became the academic and emotional winners. Notice that the trigger for their emotional strength and their learning success was their perception of their success on formal and informal assessments.

But there were other students who didn't fare so well. They scored very low on tests, beginning in the earliest grades. The emotional effect was to cause them to question their own capabilities as learners. They began to lose confidence, which, in turn, deprived them of the emotional reserves needed to continue to take risks. As their motivation warned, of course, their performance plummeted. These students embarked on what they believed to be an irreversible slide toward inevitable failure and lost hope. Once again, the emotional trigger for their decision not to try was their perception of their performance on assessments.

Consider the reality-indeed, the paradox-of the schools in which we were reared. If some students worked hard and learned a lot, that was a positive result, and they would finish high in the rank order. But if some students gave up in hopeless failure, that was an acceptable result, too, because they would occupy places very low in the rank order. Their achievement results fed into the implicit mission of schools: the greater the spread of achievement among students, the more it reinforced the rank order. This is why, if some students gave up and stopped trying (even dropped out of school), that was regarded as the student's problem, not the teacher's or the school's.

Once again, please notice who is using test results to decide whether to strive for excellence or give up in hopelessness. The"data-based decision makers" in this process are students themselves.

Students are deciding whether success is within or beyond reach, whether the learning is worth the required effort, and so whether to try or not. The critical emotions underpinning the decision making process include anxiety, fear of failure, uncertainty, and unwillingness to take risks-all triggered by students' perceptions of their own capabilities as reflected in assessment results.

Some students responded to the demands of such environments by working hard and learning a great deal. Others controlled their anxiety by giving up and not caring. The result for them is exactly the opposite of the one society wants. Instead of leaving no child behind, these practices, in effect, drove down the achievement of at least as many students as they successfully elevated. And the evidence suggests that the downside victims are more frequently members of particular socioeconomic and ethnic minorities.


What is the author's attitude towards the old mission of assessment?

A.
Supportive.
B.
Indifferent.
C.
Negative.
D.
Neutral.