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".

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: The relative bioavailability of nicotine from a nasal spray was assessed in 15 smokers suffering a common cold and rhinitis according to generally accepted criteria. The patients were given a single dose of 2 mg nicotine from the nasal spray with and without concurrent administration of a nasal vasoconstrictor decongestant, xylometazoline, in randomised order. Control session measurements were made in the disease-free state. Applying strict bioequivalence criteria, we found that common cold/rhinitis slightly reduced the bioavailability of nicotine, both in its rate and extent; the geometric mean of the ratio of Crnax , AUC and tma x were 0.81, 0.93 and 1.36, respectively. The nasal vasoconstrictor, xylometazoline, normalised the extent of the bioavailability of nicotine, but further prolonged the time for absorption to almost twice that measured in the disease-free state, increasing the tma x ratio to 1.72. The results suggest that a minor proportion of people stopping smoking with the help of a nicotine nasal spray may experience a minor reduction in the effect of the spray during common cold/rhinitis. However, the nicotine self-titration behaviour found with most smoking cessation products (except the nicotine patch) will automatically lead to an adjustment of the dosage to achieve the desired effect. 
 Title: Relative bioavailability of nicotine from a nasal spray in infectious rhinitis and after use of a topical decongestant

Output: False


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: In the era of the "sickest first" policy, patients with very high model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores have been increasingly admitted to the intensive care unit with the expectation that they will receive a liver transplant (LT) in the absence of improvement on supportive therapies. Such patients are often admitted in a context of acute-on-chronic liver failure with extrahepatic failures. Sequential assessment of scores or classification based on organ failures within the first days after admission help to stratify the risk of mortality in this population. Although the prognosis of severely ill cirrhotic patients has recently improved, transplant-free mortality remains high. LT is still the only curative treatment in this population. Yet, the increased relative scarcity of graft resource must be considered alongside the increased risk of losing a graft in the initial postoperative period when performing LT in "too sick to transplant" patients. Variables associated with poor immediate post-LT outcomes have been identified in large studies. Despite this, the performance of scores based on these variables is still insufficient. Consideration of a patient's comorbidities and frailty is an appealing predictive approach in this population that has proven of great value in many other diseases. So far, local expertise remains the last safeguard to LT. Using this expertise, data are accumulating on favourable post-LT outcomes in very high MELD populations, particularly when LT is performed in a situation of stabilization/improvement of organ failures in selected candidates. The absence of "definitive" contraindications and the control of "dynamic" contraindications allow a "transplantation window" to be defined. This window must be identified swiftly after admission given the poor short-term survival of patients with very high MELD scores. In the absence of any prospect of LT, withdrawal of care could be discussed to ensure respect of patient life, dignity and wishes. 
 Title: Approaches for patients with very high MELD scores

Output: False


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Background: Viral upper respiratory tract infection (vURI) may or may not present with a cold/flu-like illness (CFLI). Objectives: For common upper respiratory viruses that cause vURIs, to determine the relative frequencies of virus detection by PCR in subjects with and without CFLIs. Study design: Prospective follow-up of 170 children aged 1-8.6 years through the CFLI season by daily parental diary for CFLI episodes and nasal secretion sampling using PCR assays for adenovirus, coronavirus (types 229E and OC43), influenza virus (types A and B), parainfluenza (types 1-3) virus, rhinovirus, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Results: Virus was detected in 415 of 956 independent assays: 425 CFLI episodes and 531 non-CFLI periods were sampled; samples from 270 (64%) CFLI episodes and 145 (27%) non-CFLI periods contained virus detected by PCR. Rhinovirus was most frequently detected at 64%, followed by mixed viruses at 12%, RSV at 7%, and the other viruses at 3-5% of all detections. About 85% of RSV, influenza A and adenovirus detections were associated with a CFLI, whereas less than 62% of other virus detections were associated with CFLI. Conclusions: The frequency of PCR virus detection without CFLI was different among viruses. This introduces virus-specific biases to estimating the frequencies of specific complications attributable to a vURI when ascertained by CFLI identification. 
 Title: Upper respiratory virus detection without parent-reported illness in children is virus-specific


Output: False