In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Context: To elucidate the importance of hepatitis C Virus (HCV) genotype in HIV disease progression.', 'This study was conducted among 126 HIV/HCV co-infected drug users with a known interval of HIV seroconversion whose HCV genotype was known early in HIV infection. Both clinical progression (to AIDS) and immunological progression (to a CD4+ T-cell count of 200 x 10(6) cells/l) by HCV genotype were studied using Cox proportional hazards analysis.', 'The median duration of follow-up was 7.3 years [interquartile range (IQR), 4.6-10.1 years]. The majority of the HCV infections concerned genotype 1 and genotype 3; The distribution was: HCV type 1: 48%, HCV type 3: 34%, HCV type 4: 13%, multiple HCV types: 5%. Concurrent multiple infections consisted of HCV genotypes 1b+3a, 1b+4 and 3a+4. HCV genotype 1 and multiple HCV genotype infections were associated with faster immunological progression [hazard ratio (HR), 2.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-3.92 and HR, 2.74; 95% CI, 0.95-7.90, respectively]. Multiple HCV genotype infection was also associated with faster clinical progression (HR, 3.36; 95% CI, 0.82-13.79). These hazard ratios increased further and were all significant when analyses were limited to data in the pre-HAART era (HR, 3.92; 95% CI, 1.51-10.20; HR, 4.38; 95% CI, 1.04-18.40 and HR, 6.54; 95% CI, 1.39-30.76, respectively).\Question: Is infection with concurrent multiple hepatitis C virus genotypes associated with faster HIV disease progression?
HIV disease progression differs by HCV genotype and is especially faster in individuals whose HCV infection involves more than one HCV genotype. The effect of HCV genotype on HIV progression was greater in the pre-highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) era, suggesting that the effectiveness of HAART may diminish the effect of HCV genotype on HIV disease progression.

Context: In developmental research, infants are commonly assumed to be early stakeholders in interactions with their caregivers. The tools that infants can use to interact with others vary from visual contact to smiling or vocalizing, and also include motor activity. However, surprisingly few studies have explored how the nature and context of social interactions affect infants' engagement in motor activity.", "We investigated the kinematic properties of foot and face movements produced by 11 infants aged between 5 and 9 months during six contrasting dyadic episodes (i.e. passive presence of a stranger or the infant's mother, weak or intense interaction with the stranger/mother as she sings a nursery play song).", "The infants' face and foot motor activity was significantly reduced during the interactive episodes, compared with the episodes without any interaction, in both the mother and stranger conditions. Furthermore, the level of their motor activity was significantly lower in the stranger condition than in the mother one for some parameters.\Question: Is social interaction associated with changes in infants ' motor activity?
These results are in line with those reported by previous studies and confirm the relevance of using motor activity to delineate the early forms of interactive episodes in infants.

Context: The purpose of this study was to determine the yield and clinical impact of sacrum and coccyx radiographs in the emergency department (ED).', 'Consecutive sacrum and coccyx radiographs obtained in the EDs of four hospitals over a 6-year period were categorized as positive for acute fracture or dislocation, negative, or other. Five follow-up metrics were analyzed: follow-up advanced imaging in the same ED visit, follow-up advanced imaging within 30 days, new analgesic prescriptions, clinic follow-up, and surgical intervention within 60 days.', 'Sacrum and coccyx radiographs from 687 patients (mean age, 48.1 years; 61.6% women and 38.4% men) obtained at level-1 (n = 335) and level-2 (n = 352) trauma centers showed a positivity rate of 8.4% ± 2.1% (n = 58/687). None of the 58 positive cases had surgical intervention. At the level-1 trauma centers, there was no significant association between sacrum and coccyx radiograph positivity and analgesic prescription or clinical follow-up (p = 0.12; odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% CI, 0.81-6.20). At the level-2 trauma centers, 97.1% (n = 34/35) of patients with positive sacrum and coccyx radiographs received analgesic prescriptions or clinical referrals, whereas negative cases were at 82.9% (OR, 7.0; 95% CI, 0.94-52.50). Of all cases, 5.7% (n = 39) and 4.3% (n = 29) had advanced imaging in the same ED visit and within 30 days, respectively. Sacrum and coccyx radiography results had no significant correlation with advanced imaging in the same ED visit (level-1, p = 0.351; level-2, p = 0.179). There was no significant difference in 30-day advanced imaging at the level-1 trauma centers (p = 0.8), but there was at the level-2 trauma centers (p = 0.0493).\Question: Do sacrum and Coccyx Radiographs Have Limited Clinical Impact in the Emergency Department?

ED sacrum and coccyx radiographs showed a low positivity rate and had no quantifiable clinical impact. We recommend that sacrum and coccyx radiographs be eliminated from ED practice and patients treated conservatively on the basis of clinical parameters.