Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

"The story says gum costs ""a few pennies."" The study itself puts the cost at 4 cents per stick. The report does a good job of handling the statistics, with proper caveats. The story reports: The story does include a comment from a physician who warns that someone chewing gum after surgery may swallow air, which can create problems. The story explains that the findings come from an analysis of five studies, alluding to the fact that this was a meta-analysis. The story could have given a line about the quality of such evidence. The story does not exaggerate the complications following colon surgery. The story is based on a credible meta-analysis published in a top-shelf journal. The report includes comments from both a study co-author and a skeptical independent expert. The independent expert interviewed offers an alternative to chewing gum to speed recovery–introducing liquids and then foods after surgery. He also recommends avoiding the use of pain killers to speed recovery time. The availability of sugarless chewing gum is not in dispute. The story makes no claims for the novelty of the treatment. By indicating the meta-analysis is based on five previous studies, the article implies it’s been used before. The story does not draw excessively from the press release."
Study: You can chew gum and get well at same time

The story does a good job of describing the costs of angiopasty compared to a stress test. The story could have discussed out of pocket costs for patients. The story could have quantified the benefit of stress testing in its ability to avoid angiography and angioplasty associated with it. The story mentions missing cases of heart disease and difficulties of performing the test in older patients as potentional harms of stress testing, but there are other harms that the story should have mentioned. The story adequately describes the design of the current study and points out some important caveats inherent in a database-based study. The story does not exagerrate the seriousness or prevalence of stable heart disease. The story quotes multiple sources. The story mentions angiography as the alternative to stress testing. The story could have done more to describe the pros and cons of angiography compared to stress testing. Clearly stress tests are available. Clearly stress testing is not a new idea. Because the story quotes multiple experts, the reader can assume the story did not rely on a press release as the sole source of information.
More stress tests needed before angioplasties, study says

There was no mention of the cost of dietary fish oil supplements. This story clearly tells us that after one year, 11 out of 40 people in the placebo group developed a psychotic disorder, compared to 2 of the 41 people in the fish oil group. Additionally, the writer also presents the data in terms of number needed to treat (NNT), which tells the reader that 4 people need to take fish oil supplements for 12 weeks in order for 1 person to benefit. More information on what defines psychosis would have been helpful. As the story indicates, fish oil supplements are not associated with serious side effects, unlike antipsychotic drugs that can lead to weight gain and sexual dysfunction. The story might have noted that some people taking fish oil supplements have reported mild gastrointestinal side effects (e.g. diarrhea). The story did a nice job describing the study methods, specifically pointing out that half the teens and young adults received a placebo pill and half received a fish oil pill. It also mentioned that the results of this small trial should be interpreted with caution and additional studies are needed to determine if the same results can be seen in people with established psychosis, as well as those who are older. The story does not appear to exaggerate the prevalence of psychotic disorders in teens and young adults. The story does not include commentary from any independent sources. Furthermore, the quote provided by the study authors was pulled directly from the discussion section of the article. The story briefly compares the efficacy of fish oil supplements to antipsychotic medications and “other interventions.” However, more specific information on this would have been useful. Additionally, it would have been helpful to know that participants in both groups received psychosocial and psychological interventions. Fish oil pills sold as dietary supplements are widely available; however, supplement formulations can vary widely and some may only be available with a prescription. More information on the specific formulation used in the study, as well as the dosage would have been useful. This story does a nice job of setting the stage by saying that patients with psychriatric disorders have been found to have low levels of omega 3; hence the need for trials to study fish oil pills in these patients. The story also points out that other studies have evaluated the effect of omega-3 fatty acids on depression and other psychiatric disorders; however, the results of these studies have been mixed. There does not appear to be a news release associated with this story.

Fish Oil May Fight Psychosis