While the Institutional Review Board (IRB) is charged with ensuring ethical compliance across participating hospitals, investigators bear the immediate responsibility for executing protocol-specific safeguards. Because the trial spans multiple sites and staggered enrollment windows, not only must the principal investigators harmonize consent scripts, but they must also coordinate adverse event reporting so that data are comparable across contexts. If the protocol were to be revised midstream—a contingency contemplated in the statistical analysis plan—it is essential that the committee approve any amendments before data are collected; otherwise, both the validity of the findings and the integrity of the oversight process would be jeopardized. Moreover, although each hospital operates under its own administrative calendars, the IRB's determinations, which are distributed electronically, should be treated as binding upon receipt, lest avoidable delays attenuate participant protections.

Which version of the sentence best conforms to formal academic usage regarding the subjunctive mood and treatment of collective nouns?

Preparing the municipal compliance memorandum required reconciling statutory language with agency practice, a task complicated by the ordinance's ambiguous timeline provisions. The draft I inherited was rhetorically emphatic but structurally uneven: it identified noncompliance, proposed remedies, and then digressed into anecdote. In legal analysis, however, parallel construction and precise reference are not a matter of style alone; they clarify obligations and apportion responsibility. Because multiple offices share oversight, the memorandum must state not only what landlords owe tenants but also what records must be retained and for how long. Furthermore, when attributing lapses, the writer should distinguish between failures of notice and failures of documentation, lest the conclusion collapse disparate infractions into a single, vague defect. Finally, the audience—counsel, administrators, and auditors—expects prose that is at once direct and decorous, avoiding both colloquialism and unnecessary nominalization.

Which revision best achieves parallel structure and correct pronoun case while preserving a formal legal tone?

In revising the agency's environmental impact plan, the policy team confronted a familiar problem: preliminary data arrive in batches, yet deadlines demand a coherent narrative before all metrics stabilize. Because the executive summary will circulate widely, modifier placement must be scrupulous, and terms of art should be used with care. For example, only the committee, not the consultants, evaluated the raw field notes; careless positioning of 'only' would invert that meaning. Likewise, the plan's funding structure, which comprises baseline appropriations and two contingent tranches, should be described precisely, avoiding diffuse constructions that obscure who acts. Dangling introductions—Having reviewed the dataset, the policy recommends—invite ridicule in peer reviews and litigation alike. The document must therefore balance brevity with exactness, foregrounding agents and actions while reserving abstractions for definitions and appendices.

Which sentence avoids a dangling modifier and uses precise formal diction appropriate for a policy document?

In the methods section of a quantitative study, stylistic flourishes can occlude logic: readers rely on cues—relative clauses, appositives, and conjunctive adverbs—to parse causal chains. When reporting results, writers should deploy semicolons to join independent propositions whose relation is contrastive or inferential; commas, by contrast, cannot bear that weight when adverbs such as 'however' or 'therefore' mediate the connection. Nonrestrictive information, which supplements but does not delimit a noun, should be set off cleanly—with commas, parentheses, or dashes—so that the grammatical spine remains visible. Finally, demonstratives must anchor to clear antecedents; this prevents a string of 'this' and 'that' from drifting into ambiguity. Precision at the sentence level is not pedantry; it is methodology.

Which sentence correctly integrates a conjunctive adverb and a nonrestrictive clause in formal academic prose?

Because the protocol contemplates recruiting participants from multiple clinics, the Institutional Review Board emphasized, in its correspondence, that data governance must precede data collection. The principal investigator, whose prior studies have attracted scrutiny, affirmed that identifiers would be removed before any dataset is exported; nevertheless, the Board insisted on an independent audit. If the data was to be compromised, it would be necessary that the study is suspended, the memo noted, because reputational damage is not easily remediated. Although the team argued that such a contingency was improbable, the Board—citing precedent—required a written stoppage plan as a condition of approval. Moreover, the Board advised that communications with participants avoid speculative assurances, lest the consent process be vitiated by inadvertent overstatement.

Which revision of the sentence in the passage beginning "If the data was to be compromised" best conforms to formal academic English by correctly employing the subjunctive mood and maintaining parallel structure?

In preparing the compliance plan for the clinical trial, counsel reminded investigators that procedural precision functions as both shield and compass. Deviations, however trivial they may appear in the moment, accrete; in enforcement actions, agencies tend to read omissions cumulatively rather than charitably. Effective compliance requires investigators to document adverse events promptly, to notify the sponsor within 24 hours, and ________. Because protocols are often revised midstream, the plan also specifies who may authorize amendments; further, it supplies a crosswalk aligning internal forms with statutory definitions. The goal is not merely to satisfy auditors, but to embed habits of exactitude that survive the inevitable stress of recruitment deadlines. Clarity at the level of syntax, they noted, prevents ambiguity from metastasizing into liability.

Which choice best completes the sentence to maintain parallel structure and formal style?

Following the journal's thematic issue on algorithmic accountability, the editor solicited post-publication critiques from senior reviewers whose specialties, while adjacent, seldom intersect in practice. The resulting memorandum, written in a measured register and replete with cautious hedging where evidence was thinner, praised the authors' transparency but questioned the scope of their validation data. The editor invited Dr. Rao and I to review the manuscript, noting that no reviewer was more cautious than her; consequently, the draft response avoids categorical claims, and instead delineates conditions under which the findings should be treated as provisional. This exchange, the editor suggested, models the sort of collegial rigor that, if replicated across fields, could recalibrate incentives toward robustness rather than novelty.

Which revision of the sentence beginning "The editor invited Dr. Rao and I" correctly applies pronoun case in formal academic writing?

In the governance audit of the hospital system, the committee synthesized incident reports, procurement logs, and compliance attestations; the resulting recommendations are intentionally narrow, designed to be revisable as conditions change. After concluding the audit, the erroneous transactions were reported by the committee only to the board, a choice motivated by confidentiality obligations imposed under the settlement. While the public will eventually receive a redacted summary—once patient identifiers are removed and legal review is complete—the interim distribution list remains limited to oversight bodies. The memorandum therefore employs a restrained tone, eschewing speculative language in favor of explicit contingencies. That restraint is not a euphemism for evasiveness; it reflects an institutional commitment to accuracy over speed.

Which revision best eliminates the dangling modifier and clearly indicates that only the board was the recipient of the report, while maintaining formal tone?

In preparing an appellate brief for a regulatory dispute, counsel must articulate hypothetical scenarios without implying that the court has already accepted them. The agency's interpretation, although entitled to limited deference, would shift if intervening legislation altered the statute's operative terms. To preserve institutional credibility, the brief should distinguish between what the law currently compels and what it would compel under counterfactual conditions; doing so allows the argument to anticipate objections while avoiding rhetorical overreach. Additionally, where the analysis addresses prospective reforms, the prose must maintain a formal register and avoid colloquialisms that might suggest advocacy untethered from the record. The following candidate sentence is intended for the section discussing possible legislative changes. Select the version that most precisely expresses a hypothetical, preserves clear parallelism, and adheres to conventions appropriate for a professional legal audience.

Which sentence should be inserted into the brief?

During a graduate research seminar, the program director circulated proposed guidelines for a multi-site pilot. The document seeks to signal collegiality while also delineating a chain of responsibility. Because several faculty members will mentor student investigators, the statement must be precise about comparative commitments and about who, ultimately, will make time-sensitive decisions. In drafting the announcement, the director wished to acknowledge a particular colleague's unusually heavy lift without sounding exclusionary; she also wanted to codify a requirement concerning the project's lead. The following candidate sentence is intended for the closing paragraph of that announcement. Choose the option that best observes formal pronoun case in comparisons and prepositional phrases, and that correctly employs the mandative subjunctive to express a requirement.

Which sentence best satisfies these aims?