In this task, you are given a paragraph (from a research paper) and your task is to classify each sentence of the paragraph (assume n sentence) into the following categories: Background, Purpose, Method, Finding/Contribution, or Other. Return the output in this format: 1 - category of sentence 1, 2 - category of sentence 2, ..., n - category of sentence n; where each number indicates the order of the sentence. The categories can be identified using the following questions: 
 Background: - Why is this problem important? - What relevant works have been done before? - What did the previous works miss? - What are the high-level research questions? - How might this help other researchers?
 Purpose: - What specific things do the researchers want to do? - What specific knowledge do the researchers want to know? - What specific hypothesis do the researchers want to test?
 Method: - How did the researchers do it or find it out? - What are the procedures and steps of this research?
 Finding/Contribution: - What did the researchers find out? Did the proposed methods work? - Did things behave as the researchers expected?
Other: put every text fragment that does not fit into any of the categories above here. Put a sentence here if its not in English, is not part of the article, contains numbers and dates, is a caption of a figure or a table, is a formatting error, or you are not sure about it.

Input: Consider Input: Background: Respiratory viral infections can cause significant morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients. Conventional tests routinely available at most institutions are limited by the number of detectable pathogens, by a poor sensitivity and/or a long turnaround time. Objectives: To compare the performance of routine conventional testing with direct fluorescent antibody assays and viral culture to a customized TaqMan® array card (TAC) real-time PCR method, targeting 24 viruses, 8 bacteria and 2 fungi simultaneously. Study design: We collected 143 respiratory samples from 120 symptomatic immunocompromised patients. Samples for which conventional and TAC results were discordant underwent further verification testing. Results: The TAC assay identified viral pathogens in more samples than did conventional testing (77/143 versus 27/143; McNemar P < 0.0001), even when TAC results for viruses that could not be detected by conventional testing were excluded from analysis (59/143 versus 26/143; P < 0.0001). In addition, the TAC assay identified 18 samples with non-viral pathogens. Verification testing confirmed positive TAC results for 50 out of 55 samples for which conventional testing was negative. Two out of three samples with a positive conventional test but negative TAC result were confirmed positive. A viral and a total pathogen co-infection rate of 5.6% and 11.8% were found, respectively. Conclusions: The customized TAC assay resulted in a significantly increased identification of respiratory viruses. This study provides a practical real-life assessment of the performance of the TAC assay in a population for whom rapid and accurate diagnosis of viral and atypical pathogens is crucial for appropriate clinical management.

Output: 1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - background, 4 - purpose, 5 - purpose, 6 - method, 7 - method, 8 - finding, 9 - finding, 10 - finding, 11 - finding, 12 - finding, 13 - finding, 14 - finding, 15 - finding


Input: Consider Input: Background: During the early phases of the 2009 pandemic, subjects with influenza-like illness only had laboratory testing specific for the new A(H1N1)pdm09 virus. Findings: Between 25 th May and 7 th June 2009, during the pandemic CONTAIN phase, A(H1N1)pdm09 virus was detected using nucleic acid tests in only 56 of 1466 (3.8%) samples meeting the clinical case definition required for A(H1N1)pdm09 testing. Two hundred and fifty-five randomly selected A(H1N1)pdm09 virus-negative samples were tested for other respiratory viruses using a real-time multiplex PCR assay. Of the 255 samples tested, 113 (44.3%) had other respiratory viruses detected: rhinoviruses 63.7%, seasonal influenza A 17.6%, respiratory syncytial virus 7.9%, human metapneumovirus 5.3%, parainfluenzaviruses 4.4%, influenza B virus 4.4%, and enteroviruses 0.8%. Viral co-infections were present in 4.3% of samples. Conclusions: In the very early stages of a new pandemic, limiting testing to only the novel virus will miss other clinically important co-circulating respiratory pathogens.

Output: 1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - finding, 4 - finding, 5 - finding, 6 - finding, 7 - finding, 8 - finding, 9 - finding, 10 - finding, 11 - finding, 12 - finding, 13 - finding, 14 - finding, 15 - finding


Input: Consider Input: The results of the present survey indicated that infection of peafowls with T. gondii is widespread in Yunnan Province, which has significant public health concerns and implications for prevention and control of toxoplamosis in this province. To our knowledge, this is the first seroprevalence report of T. gondii infection in China's southwestern Yunnan Province.


Output: 1 - finding, 2 - finding, 3 - finding