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.

Ex Input:
The story makes it clear that cost of the test is currently speculative (“could cost about $500”) and goes even further to caution that: “Johns Hopkins holds the patent and has not licensed it as yet to a company that would ultimately set the price.” The story makes the two key results of the test quite clear. First, that the 1,005 people tested already had been diagnosed with one of eight common cancers, and the blood test was able to detect cancer in about 70 percent of them. Second, the test was also given to 812 people without cancer and only a false reading for cancer less than 1 percent of the time. Including the additional finding that the test was only able to detect cancer in about 40 percent of the patients with early cancer (ie. stage I) was a thoughtful way of introducing the relevant issue of falsely negative tests. The story does an excellent job of finding an independent source who explains that one of the potential risks of cancer screening tests is either identifying cancers that are not there, or are benign, and can lead to “pointless and potentially dangerous treatments.” The opposite harm is also mentioned; that is, a screening test that erroneously gives a negative result, leading providers to falsely reassure a patient that cancer is not there. Cautious language is used at many points in the story and it does three things quite well. First, it lists the most important limitation of the study: The screening test studied was unable to identify the type of cancer. Second, the implications of both falsely positive and falsely negative tests were explained succinctly and placed in a clinical context that would matter to those undergoing screening. Finally, we were very encouraged by the inclusion of this sentence: “… the researchers will still have to demonstrate that the test improves and extends the lives of cancer patients.” There is no disease mongering in this story. The two independent sources cited provide important context for understanding the strengths, limitations, and clinical context of the screening test. This was a tough call, but ultimately we felt the story would have been stronger had it mentioned the performance of current screening methods for some of the cancer types, such as Cologuard for colon cancer. That said, we were glad the story included some of the pitfalls of screening for prostate and breast cancer, as well as the long struggle to develop more blood tests for cancer. It’s mentioned the authors of the study are “hoping their idea would eventually lead to a $500 test … but they have a long way to go.” Future studies of the screening test are also discussed, so it seems clear this test is not currently available. It’s made clear that “there have been many attempts over the decades to develop blood tests to screen for cancers … but these methods don’t give reliable results.” It’s also pointed out that what makes this screening test unique is that it combines two previously used methods (screening for proteins and for DNA) into one test. This story does not appear to rely upon a news release.

Ex Output:
Scientists Edge Closer To A Blood Test To Detect Cancers


Ex Input:
Although some of these infections can be treated easily, others - like the superbug MRSA and other drug-resistant bugs - can be fatal or affect patients’ health very seriously, taking several months of costly hospital care and medication to beat. A survey by the European Centre for Diseases Prevention and Control (ECDC) found that on any given day, one in 18 patients in European hospitals has at least one hospital-acquired infection - amounting to around 3.2 million patients per year. “Healthcare-associated infections pose a major public health problem and a threat to European patients,” said Marc Sprenger, director of the Stockholm-based ECDC. He said many of these infections could be prevented by well thought-out, sustained and multi-pronged prevention and control programs and he urged hospitals to step up the fight. “Such programs, as well as prudent use of antibiotics, will help all actors involved to protect the patients of European hospitals,” he said in a statement. The ECDC warned last year that doctors are increasingly having to turn to last-ditch antibiotics due to growing drug-resistant superbug infections in Europe - many of them acquired in hospitals. The latest survey, which covered 1,000 hospitals in 30 European countries, found the highest rates of hospital-acquired infections were among patients admitted to intensive care units, where 19.5 percent of patients had at least one bug they had picked up from the hospital. The most common types of infection are respiratory tract infections such as pneumonia and infections of the bloodstream. These are often caused by Klebsiella pneumonia and E. coli bacteria, both of which have shown an ability to develop resistance to some of the most powerful antibiotics. Among a total 15,000 reported healthcare-associated infections, surgical site infections and urinary tract infections are also common. Many of the infections are also found to be drug-resistant “superbugs”, the survey showed. Among all infections with Staphylococcus aureus bacteria in which full testing was carried out, more than 40 percent were reported as resistant to methicillin - in other words they were MRSA infections, the ECDC said. Worldwide, MRSA infects an estimated 53 million people annually and costs more than $20 billion a year to treat. It kills around 20,000 people a year in the United States and a similar number in Europe. EU health and consumer affairs commissioner Paola Testori Coggi said the findings of the European survey were “worrying” and urged health authorities to do more to protect patients in hospital and to step up the fight against antibiotic resistance. Drug resistance is driven by the misuse and overuse of antibiotics, which encourages bacteria to develop new ways of overcoming them. Experts say hospitals are often guilty of overusing antibiotics, giving them as “blanket” treatments before full testing has established which drugs are really needed.

Ex Output:
Three million Europeans catch infections in hospital annually.


Ex Input:
The Illinois Department of Public Health on Thursday did not release any information about the victim, nor when or where the death occurred. According to the department, 187 people in Illinois, ranging from 13 years to 75 years old have experienced lung injuries after e-cigarette use. Public Health director Dr. Ngozi Ezike says it is important that people not use e-cigarettes or vaping products containing tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The highest risk for lung injury associated with the use of e-cigarettes appears to be among those who use THC containing products. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says as of Nov. 20, there have been 2,290 reported cases of lung injuries resulting from e-cigarette use nationwide, with 47 deaths.

Ex Output:

Illinois reports its fifth death connected to vaping.