In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".
--------
Question: Paragraph: Clinical metagenomics (CMg) is the discipline that refers to the sequencing of all nucleic acid material present within a clinical specimen with the intent to recover clinically relevant microbial information. From a diagnostic perspective, next-generation sequencing (NGS) offers the ability to rapidly identify putative pathogens and predict their antimicrobial resistance profiles to optimize targeted treatment regimens. Since the introduction of metagenomics nearly a decade ago, numerous reports have described successful applications in an increasing variety of biological specimens, such as respiratory secretions, cerebrospinal fluid, stool, blood and tissue. Considerable advancements in sequencing and computational technologies in recent years have made CMg a promising tool in clinical microbiology laboratories. Moreover, costs per sample and turnaround time from specimen receipt to clinical management continue to decrease, making the prospect of CMg more feasible. Many difficulties, however, are associated with CMg and warrant further improvements such as the informatics infrastructure and analytical pipelines. Thus, the current review focuses on comprehensively assessing applications of CMg for diagnostic and subtyping purposes. Crown 
 Title: Highlighting Clinical Metagenomics for Enhanced Diagnostic Decision-making: A Step Towards Wider Implementation

Answer: True


Question: Paragraph: Only a month after the outbreak of pneumonia caused by 2019-nCoV, more than forty-thousand people were infected. This put enormous pressure on the Chinese government, medical healthcare provider, and the general public, but also made the international community deeply nervous. On the 25th day after the outbreak, the Chinese government implemented strict traffic restrictions on the area where the 2019-nCoV had originateddHubei province, whose capital city is Wuhan. Ten days later, the rate of increase of cases in Hubei showed a significant difference (p ¼ 0.0001) compared with the total rate of increase in other provinces of China. These preliminary data suggest the effectiveness of a traffic restriction policy for this pandemic thus far. At the same time, solid financial support and improved research ability, along with network communication technology, also greatly facilitated the application of epidemic prevention measures. These measures were motivated by the need to provide effective treatment of patients, and involved consultation with three major groups in policy formulationdpublic health experts, the government, and the general public. It was also aided by media and information technology, as well as international cooperation. This experience will provide China and other countries with valuable lessons for quickly coordinating and coping with future public health emergencies. 
 Title: Lessons learned from the 2019-nCoV epidemic on prevention of future infectious diseases

Answer: False


Question: Paragraph: Recently, AdvanSure™ kit based on multiplex real-time PCR was developed for simultaneous detection of 14 respiratory viruses (RVs). We compared the performance of AdvanSure with those of Seeplex® RV 15 ACE and culture by determining their sensitivities and specificities against a composite reference standard. Four hundred thirty-seven respiratory samples were tested by modified shell vial culture method, RV 15 ACE, and AdvanSure. One hundred fourteen samples (26.2%) out of 437 samples were positive by culture, while additional 91 (20.8%) were positive by AdvanSure or RV15. One hundred twelve of 114 culture-positive samples were positive by AdvanSure except 2 samples (1 adenovirus, 1 respiratory syncytial virus [RSV]). Overall, the sensitivities of culture, RV15, and AdvanSure were 74.5%, 89.8%, and 95.1%, respectively. Sensitivities of culture, RV15, and AdvanSure for each virus tested were as follows: 91/100/96% for influenza A, 60/0/100% for influenza B, 63/95/97% for RSV, 69/81/89% for adenovirus, and 87/93/93% for parainfluenza virus. For viruses not covered by culture, sensitivities of RV15 and AdvanSure were as follows: 77/88% for rhinovirus, 100/100% for coronavirus OC43, 40/100% for coronavirus 229E/NL63, 13/100% for metapneumovirus, and 44/100% for bocavirus. The overall specificities of culture, RV15, and AdvanSure were 100/98.9/ 99.5%, respectively. Of 45 coinfected specimens, AdvanSure detected 41 specimens (91.1%) as coinfected, while RV15 detected 27 specimens (60.0%) as coinfected. AdvanSure assay demonstrated exquisite performance for the detection of RVs and will be a valuable tool for the management of RV infection. 
 Title: Evaluation of the AdvanSure™ real-time RT-PCR compared with culture and Seeplex RV15 for simultaneous detection of respiratory viruses ☆

Answer:
True