Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Example Input: Context: Recently we have shown that the imunoglobulins G from blood serum of some multiple sclerosis patients are capable of cleaving histone H1.', 'To check whether histone H1-hydrolyzing abzymes could be detected not only in blood plasma of autoimmune patients, but also during cancer development, particularly during the onset of multiple myeloma.', "Immunoglobulines were isolated from blood serum of multiple myeloma patients (n = 11) by precipitation with 50% ammonium sulfate and tested for proteolytic activity toward linker and core calf thymus histones. Antibody preparations able to cleaved histone H1 were subjected to affinity chromatography on histone H1-Sepharose with following analysis of chromatographic fractions' protease activity. To prove that antibody molecules are responsible for hydrolysis of histone H1, gel filtration at acidic pH with subsequent examination of protease activity of chromatographic fractions (pH-shock analysis) was used.", 'It was found that 3 of 11 antibody preparations are capable of hydrolyzing calf thymus histone H1 but not core histones. It was shown that histone H1-hydrolysing activity of 2 proteolytically active antibody preparations is associated with IgGs that possess affinity towards histone H1. pH-shock analysis proved that protease activity towards histone H1 is intrinsic property of IgG molecules.
Answer: We demonstrated the existence of previously unknown histone H1 hydrolyzing IgG abzymes in the serum of multiple myeloma patients. Possible biological role of hisH1-hydrolyzing antibodies in patients with multiple myeloma was discussed.
Example Output: Are blood serum immunoglobulins of patients with multiple myeloma capable of hydrolysing histone H1?

Example Input: Context: Despite recent advances in preoperative diagnostic imaging and operative techniques, biliary variation of the donor still remains a challenge in the procurement of graft. The supraportal right bile duct (BD) variant including presentation as trifurcation is a potential trap for injuring the remnant bile duct of donor.', 'Before living/related-donor liver transplantation (LRLT), cholangiogram with magnetic resonance images of each donor was performed as a routine. After exploration of the donor before hilar dissection, intraoperative chloangiography (IOC) was routinely performed. Among the supraportal right bile duct variants, if the preoperative cholangiography showed a suspected trifurcation of the bile duct, we then performed 3 sessions of IOC during liver graft procurement, including prior to hilar dissection, before the division of bile ducts and after the division. We reviewed the cholangiogram and the postoperative laboratory data of a consecutive series of 25 donors of LRLT.', 'There was no division injury of the remnant bile duct of all of the donors.
Answer: Repeated IOC is suggested as a routine for variants of supraportal right bile ducts especially trifurcation pattern in graft procurement to avoid the injury of donor remnant bile ducts.
Example Output: Is repeated introperative cholangiography helpful for donor safety in the procurement of right liver graft with supraportal right bile duct variants in living-donor liver transplantation?

Example Input: Context: In Australia, adult immunisation coverage is primarily monitored via periodic telephone surveys that rely on self-reported immunisation status. All Australian residents are eligible for Medicare, so we examined the feasibility of using immunisation-specific Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) item numbers to monitor and estimate adult influenza immunisation coverage.', 'Baseline questionnaire data from 267 129 participants from the 45 and Up Study, a prospective cohort study, were linked to data containing information on individual MBS immunisation-specific items from 2006 to 2011. Temporal trends in recording of these items were examined. Self-reported influenza immunisation status obtained from a follow-up questionnaire from 27 036 participants was then compared with the MBS immunisation records.', 'From 2006 to 2011, the pattern of MBS immunisation claims was consistent with self-reported influenza immunisation trends, with annual peaks occurring from March to May. There was fair agreement between MBS immunisation records and self-reported influenza immunisation: 48.8% (95% CI 47.1, 50.4) of participants who self-reported influenza immunisation had a matching MBS record, and 79.6% (95% CI 78.8, 80.4) who reported never having influenza immunisation had no matching MBS record. However, compared with self-reported influenza vaccination for people aged ≥65 years from the 2009 Adult Immunisation Telephone Survey (74.6%), the proportion of participants aged >65 years with an MBS immunisation record was low, with an annual median of 39.3% (range 28.3%-62.1%).
Answer: MBS immunisation item data are readily available and may be useful to monitor trends in adult influenza immunisation, but they are likely to substantially underestimate coverage. Other approaches, such as capture of general practitioner-delivered influenza vaccine doses or a whole-of-life immunisation register, are needed to comprehensively monitor and estimate adult immunisation coverage for influenza and other recommended adult vaccines.
Example Output:
Do medicare Benefits Schedule data to monitor influenza immunisation in Australian adults?