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.

Example Input: Context: Sepsis from burn injuries can result from colonisation of burn wounds, especially in large surface area burns. Reducing bacterial infection will reduce morbidity and mortality, and mortality for severe burns can be as high as 15\xa0%. There are various quantitative and semi-quantitative techniques to monitor bacterial load on wounds. In the UK, burn wounds are typically monitored for the presence or absence of bacteria through the collection and culture of swabs, but no absolute count is obtained. Quantitative burn wound culture provides a measure of bacterial count and is gaining increased popularity in some countries. It is however more resource intensive, and evidence for its utility appears to be inconsistent. This systematic review therefore aims to assess the evidence on the utility and reliability of different quantitative microbiology techniques in terms of diagnosing or predicting clinical outcomes.', 'Standard systematic review methods aimed at minimising bias will be employed for study identification, selection and data extraction. Bibliographic databases and ongoing trial registers will be searched and conference abstracts screened. Studies will be eligible if they are prospective studies or systematic reviews of burn patients (any age) for whom quantitative microbiology has been performed, whether it is compared to another method. Quality assessment will be based on quality assessment tools for diagnostic and prognostic studies and tailored to the review as necessary. Synthesis is likely to be primarily narrative, but meta-analysis may be considered where clinical and methodological homogeneity exists.\Question: Do protocol for a systematic review of quantitative burn wound microbiology in the management of burns patients?
Example Output: Given the increasing use of quantitative methods, this is a timely systematic review, which will attempt to clarify the evidence base. As far as the authors are aware, it will be the first to address this topic.

Example Input: Context: Non-viral gene transfer efficiency is low as compared to viral vector systems. Here we describe the discovery of new drugs that are capable of enhancing non-viral gene transfer into mammalian cells using a novel two-stage screening procedure.', 'First, potential candidates are preselected from a molecular library at various concentrations by a semi-automated yeast transfection screen (YTS). The maximal transfection efficiency of every positive drug is subsequently determined in independent experiments at the optimal concentration and compared to the inhibitory effect of the drug on cell growth (IC50). In a subsequent mammalian cell transfection screen (MTS), the maximal transfection efficiency and the IC50 are determined for all preselected drugs using a human cell line and a luciferase reporter gene construct.', 'Employing our novel system we have been able to identify a new class of transfection enhancers, the tricyclic antidepressants (i.e. doxepin, maprotiline, desipramine and amoxapine). All positive drugs enhanced gene transfer in both yeast and human cell lines, but lower concentrations were sufficient for mammalian cells. With a triple combination of doxepin, amoxapine and chloroquine we obtained a transfection efficiency that exceeded that of chloroquine, one of the best-known transfection enhancers of mammalian cells, by nearly one order of magnitude.\Question: Does novel two-stage screening procedure lead to the identification of a new class of transfection enhancers?
Example Output: Non-viral gene transfer efficiency can be increased significantly using new transfection enhancers that are identified by a novel, semi-automated two-stage screening system employing yeast cells in the first and specific human target cells in the second round.

Example Input: Context: There is insufficient knowledge of infectious risk in patients after splenectomy; minimal data exists specifically for trauma patients. This study evaluated patient knowledge and practices regarding infection risk after traumatic splenectomy. Our hypothesis was that patients with poor knowledge regarding their asplenic state would be less likely to pursue medical care in the event of an illness than those with good knowledge.', 'Non-randomized, cohort study of all posttraumatic splenectomy patients < or =11 years after injury in 2 rural trauma centers. Patients received a validated questionnaire; weighted responses determined knowledge about infection risks and appropriate follow-up actions.', 'Fifty-four percent of patients responded to the questionnaire. Overall, 47% of responders were identified as having adequate knowledge regarding infectious risk, and only 28% would pursue appropriate medical care. Of patients with adequate knowledge, 42% were more likely to pursue appropriate care versus 15% of patients with inadequate knowledge (p = 0.06). Patients with adequate knowledge were more likely to receive an annual influenza vaccine (p = 0.03) and contact their provider with fewer symptoms (p = 0.03). Logistic regression revealed significant interactions between knowledge and presence of comorbidities (p = 0.04). Focusing on patients with poor knowledge and absence of comorbidities, none would engage in appropriate action in the event of illness (p < 0.01). A longer time since injury, >3 years, was associated with a diminished likelihood of appropriate action (p = 0.03). The relationship between knowledge and action was not accounted for by other potential confounders.\Question: Do time lapse and comorbidities influence patient knowledge and pursuit of medical care after traumatic splenectomy?
Example Output:
Trauma patients retain minimal knowledge about infection risk after splenectomy and are not likely to pursue appropriate medical care. Time since injury negatively influences patient actions. Healthcare providers must be more proactive to develop new strategies in educating these patients, particularly those without comorbidities and those greater than 3 years postsplenectomy.