A review of past integration tickets finds that 65% of delays involved missing patient identifiers. What is the best description of a conclusion that identifier problems may cause many future delays?

### Why this is right The conclusion generalizes from past observations to a likely pattern in future cases. That is inductive reasoning, and its prediction is probable rather than guaranteed. ### The concept Induction uses specific cases to form broader conclusions. The percentage gives evidence for a pattern, but it does not prove that every future delay will have the same cause. The strength of the prediction depends on how representative and informative the observations are. ### The other options - **B. A deductive conclusion guaranteed by a general rule**: No general rule is being applied, and the observed percentage does not guarantee the prediction. - **C. A rebuttal to a counterargument**: A rebuttal responds to an objection, which is not described here. - **D. A premise that makes every future delay certain**: The observation is evidence for a probable pattern, not certainty about every case. ### Remember Past cases can support a forecast, but induction does not guarantee what will happen next.