instruction:
In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.
question:
The development of high-throughput DNA sequencing technologies has enabled large-scale characterization of functional antibody repertoires, a new method of understanding protective and pathogenic immune responses. Important parameters to consider when sequencing antibody repertoires include the methodology, the B-cell population and clinical characteristics of the individuals analysed, and the bioinformatic analysis. Although focused sequencing of immunoglobulin heavy chains or complement determining regions can be utilized to monitor particular immune responses and B-cell malignancies, high-fidelity analysis of the full-length paired heavy and light chains expressed by individual B cells is critical for characterizing functional antibody repertoires. Bioinformatic identification of clonal antibody families and recombinant expression of representative members produces recombinant antibodies that can be used to identify the antigen targets of functional immune responses and to investigate the mechanisms of their protective or pathogenic functions. Integrated analysis of coexpressed functional genes provides the potential to further pinpoint the most important antibodies and clonal families generated during an immune response. Sequencing antibody repertoires is transforming our understanding of immune responses to autoimmunity, vaccination, infection and cancer. We anticipate that antibody repertoire sequencing will provide next-generation biomarkers, diagnostic tools and therapeutic antibodies for a spectrum of diseases, including rheumatic diseases.
answer:
Sequencing the functional antibody repertoire-diagnostic and therapeutic discovery


question:
The novel coronavirus, COVID-19, has sparked an outflow of scientific research seeking to understand the virus, its spread, and best practices in prevention and treatment. If this international research effort is going to be as swift and effective as possible, it will need to rely on a principle of open science. When researchers share data, code, and software and generally make their work as transparent as possible, it allows other researchers to verify and expand upon their work. Furthermore, it allows public officials to make informed decisions. In this study, we analyzed 535 preprint articles related to COVID-19 for eight transparency criteria and recorded study location and funding information. We found that individual researchers have lined up to help during this crisis, quickly tackling important public health questions, often without funding or support from outside organizations. However, most authors could improve their data sharing and scientific reporting practices. The contrast between researchers' commitment to doing important research and their reporting practices reveals underlying weaknesses in the research community's reporting habits, but not necessarily their science.
answer:
Reproducibility and reporting practices in COVID-19 preprint manuscripts


question:
National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England were commissioned by the Department of Health (DH) and developed during 1998-2000 by a nurse-led multi-professional team of researchers and specialist clinicians. Following extensive consultation, they were published in January 2001. 1 These guidelines describe the precautions healthcare workers should take in three areas: standard principles for preventing HCAI, which include hospital environmental hygiene, hand hygiene, the use of personal protective equipment, and the safe use and disposal of sharps; preventing infections associated with the use of short-term indwelling urethral catheters; and preventing infections associated with central venous catheters. The evidence for these guidelines was identified by multiple systematic reviews of experimental and nonexperimental research and expert opinion as reflected in systematically identified professional, national and international guidelines, which were formally assessed by a validated appraisal process. In 2003, we developed complementary national guidelines for preventing HCAI in primary and community care on behalf of the National Collaborating Centre for Nursing and Supportive Care (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence). 2 A cardinal feature of evidence-based guidelines is that they are subject to timely review in order that new research evidence and technological advances can be identified, appraised and, if shown to be effective in preventing HCAI, incorporated into amended guidelines. Periodically updating the evidence base and guideline recommendations is essential in order to maintain their validity and authority. Consequently, the DH commissioned a review of new evidence published following the last systematic reviews. We have now updated the evidence base for making infection prevention and control recommendations. A critical assessment of the updated evidence indicated that the original epic guidelines published in 2001 remain robust, relevant and appropriate but that adjustments need to be
answer:

epic2: National Evidence-Based Guidelines for Preventing Healthcare-Associated Infections in NHS Hospitals in England 1 Introductory section 1.1 Guideline Development Team