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".

Q: Paragraph: Metagenomics is currently the only generic method for pathogen detection. Starting from RNA allows the assessment of the whole sample community including RNA viruses. Here we present our modular concerted protocol for sample processing for diagnostic metagenomics analysis of human, animal, and food samples. The workflow does not rely on dedicated amplification steps at any stage in the process and, in contrast to published methods, libraries prepared accordingly will yield only minute amounts of unclassifiable reads. We confirmed the performance of the approach using a spectrum of pathogen/ matrix-combinations showing it has the potential to become a commonly usable analytical framework. Diagnostic metagenomics with high-throughput sequencing (HTS) techniques continuously gains importance for broad and swift identification of pathogens in human, animal, and food samples 1 . While for known pathogens, highly sensitive and specific diagnostic methods like real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) are in routine use and deliver reliable results, the identification of unrecognized pathogens, meaning unexpected or newly emerging pathogens or pathogens that are only distantly related with known ones, can be very difficult. In this respect, metagenomics using HTS are much more promising than routine diagnostics. Unrecognized pathogens, especially newly emerging zoonoses, may cause serious infectious diseases, and a delay of medical treatment or development of vaccines might have fatal consequences for the affected patients and animal stocks. Such delays can be caused by performing numerous laborious screening tests until the potential pathogen is found instead of a single comprehensive screening test. Prominent cases of emerging infectious diseases caused by novel or varying viruses for instance are the discovery of the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus in 2012 2 , the tremendous Ebola outbreak in 2014 3 , the report on a novel zoonotic bornavirus 4 , or the detection of the new Schmallenberg virus 5 affecting domestic and wild ruminants. However, infectious diseases with clinical signs like high fever, diarrhoea, or encephalitis − often life-threatening − can be caused by very different infectious agents 6,7 , not only viruses. In such puzzling cases, a generic approach that works likewise successful and efficient for all pathogen groups, as sketched in Fig. 1 , is essential. In a number of review articles 1,8-12 , valuable considerations for this approach have been summarized. In addition to the overall workflow outlined in Fig. 1 , after metagenomic analysis, it is desirable to confirm the initial sequencing-based suspicion by other methods and in the ideal case by fulfilling the Henle-Loeffler-Koch postulates 13 as for example done in case of the Schmallenberg virus 5 . Metagenomics for generic pathogen detection, so-called diagnostic metagenomics, in its pure form is a broad and undirected approach to find gene sequences or sequence fragments of infectious agents within sequence data sets of the whole community of a sample generated by high-throughput sequencing. A crucial point when handling diagnostic sequencing approaches is to explicitly distinguish between i) high-throughput well-standardisable routine diagnostics for expected known pathogens and ii) diagnostic metagenomics for all including unrecognized pathogens. The first approach is easier to design based on the spectrum of known sequences, testing with specific oligonucleotide primers for pathogens of known identity 14,15 , known tropism, and maybe also of a known proportion within a sample. The latter one − used for unrecognized pathogens like in the case of Schmallenberg virus 5 − should be a generic approach that can ideally be applied to all samples and pathogens. This approach can indeed be developed and tested using samples of known origin and pathogen content. In case of an emergency, however, there might be no information about nature and proportion of the pathogen and only clinical data could be available, and the sample is a closed book. For these cases, metagenomics Published: xx xx xxxx OPEN www.nature.com/scientificreports/ 
 Title: A Versatile Sample Processing Workflow for Metagenomic Pathogen Detection OPEN

A: False
****
Q: Paragraph: Pathogens that spill over between species cause a significant human and animal health burden. Here, we describe characteristics of animal reservoirs that are required for pathogen spillover. We assembled and analyzed a database of 330 disease systems in which a pathogen spills over from a reservoir of one or more species. Three-quarters of reservoirs included wildlife, and 84% included mammals. Further, 65% of pathogens depended on a community of reservoir hosts, rather than a single species, for persistence. Among mammals, the most frequently identified reservoir hosts were rodents, artiodactyls, and carnivores. The distribution among orders of mammalian species identified as reservoirs did not differ from that expected by chance. Among disease systems with high priority pathogens and epidemic potential, we found birds, primates, and bats to be overrepresented. We also analyzed the life history traits of mammalian reservoir hosts and compared them to mammals as a whole. Reservoir species had faster life history characteristics than mammals overall, exhibiting traits associated with greater reproductive output rather than long-term survival. Thus, we find that in many respects, reservoirs of spillover pathogens are indeed special. The described patterns provide a useful resource for studying and managing emerging infectious diseases. 
 Title: Are disease reservoirs special? Taxonomic and life history characteristics

A: False
****
Q: Paragraph: Purpose-Mathematical and simulation models are increasingly used to plan for and evaluate health sector responses to disasters, yet no clear consensus exists regarding best practices for the design, conduct, and reporting of such models. We examined a large selection of published health sector disaster response models to generate a set of best practice guidelines for such models. Methods-We reviewed a spectrum of published disaster response models addressing public health or healthcare delivery, focusing in particular on the type of disaster and response decisions considered, decision makers targeted, choice of outcomes evaluated, modeling methodology, and reporting format. We developed initial recommendations for best practices for creating and reporting such models and refined these guidelines after soliciting feedback from response modeling experts and from members of the Society for Medical Decision Making. Results-We propose six recommendations for model construction and reporting, inspired by the most exemplary models: Health sector disaster response models should address real-world problems; be designed for maximum usability by response planners; strike the appropriate balance between simplicity and complexity; include appropriate outcomes, which extend beyond those considered in traditional cost-effectiveness analyses; and be designed to evaluate the many uncertainties inherent in disaster response. Finally, good model reporting is particularly critical for disaster response models. Conclusions-Quantitative models are critical tools for planning effective health sector responses to disasters. The recommendations we propose can increase the applicability and interpretability of future models, thereby improving strategic, tactical, and operational aspects of preparedness planning and response. Modeling Methodology Disaster Evaluated † Decision Makers Considered * Geographic Setting Decisions Modeled § Outcomes ¶ (Reference) Purpose of Model/Study Modeling Methodology Disaster Evaluated † Decision Makers Considered * Geographic Setting Decisions Modeled § Outcomes ¶ (Reference) Purpose of Model/Study Modeling Methodology Disaster Evaluated † Decision Makers Considered * Geographic Setting 
 Title: Risk Analysis

A:
False
****