In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Example Input: Context: A malaria management protocol was developed and implemented at a tertiary care children's hospital in September 1999. We retrospectively evaluated children admitted with malaria 10-years preimplementation and 7-years postimplementation to determine the impact the protocol had on management and time delay to appropriate antimalarial therapy.", 'This before and after study compared all admissions with the discharge diagnosis of malaria in the study period. Retrospective chart review was used to determine the time from emergency department (ED) registration to administration of antimalarial treatment. Other outcomes measured included mortality, length of hospital stay, and intensive care unit admission.', 'Fifty-eight admissions were identified during the defined period, most of which were due to Plasmodium falciparum[r] malaria. Thirty-one (53.4%) cases were before implementation of the protocol. Children were more likely to receive appropriate investigations to assess for possible severe malaria before transfer from the ED to the ward after protocol implementation (18% vs. 63%, P = 0.005). Analysis of index cases of malaria, excluding patients diagnosed after the diagnosis of a sibling, showed there was a significant reduction in time to medication administration (8 vs. 5.5 hours, P = 0.036).\Question: Does protocol for management of imported pediatric malaria decrease time to medication administration?
Example Output: After broad-based implementation of a malaria treatment protocol in a pediatric hospital, children received more thorough investigations, were more likely to receive therapy before leaving the ED and had a shorter delay before receiving appropriate antimalarial therapy.

Example Input: Context: Chronic inflammation is hypothesized to influence prostate cancer development, although a definitive link has not been established.', 'Prostate cancer cases (N = 191) detected on a for-cause (clinically indicated) or end-of-study (protocol directed) biopsy, and frequency-matched controls (N = 209), defined as negative for cancer on an end-of-study biopsy, were sampled from the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. Inflammation prevalence and extent in benign areas of biopsy cores were visually assessed using digital images of hematoxylin and eosin-stained sections. Logistic regression was used to estimate associations.', 'Of note, 86.2% of cases and 78.2% of controls had at least one biopsy core (of three assessed) with inflammation in benign areas, most of which was chronic. Men who had at least one biopsy core with inflammation had 1.78 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-3.06] times the odds of prostate cancer compared with men who had zero cores with inflammation. The association was stronger for high-grade disease (Gleason sum 7-10, N = 94; OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.06-4.71). These patterns were present when restricting to cases and controls in whom intraprostatic inflammation was the least likely to have influenced biopsy recommendation because their prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was low (<2 ng/mL at biopsy).\Question: Is chronic inflammation in benign prostate tissue associated with high-grade prostate cancer in the placebo arm of the prostate cancer prevention trial?
Example Output: Inflammation, most of which was chronic, was common in benign prostate tissue, and was positively associated with prostate cancer, especially high grade. The association did not seem to be due to detection bias.

Example Input: Context: Three-year colonoscopic surveillance after initial polypectomy may not be required for all patients. Those with multiple baseline polyps and large adenomas, implicated as predictors of colon cancer, merit close observation. Conversely, patients with single small adenomas may be subjected to early endoscopic surveillance unnecessarily.', 'From our Adenoma Registry we evaluated patient and adenoma characteristics in 697 patients. All had an adenoma recurrence within 3 years of a positive baseline colonoscopy. Potential risk factors studied were age, gender, number of adenomas, size of largest adenoma and histology. We defined a significant outcome as size of 1 cm or greater, tubulovillous or villous histology, high-grade dysplasia, carcinoma in situ, invasive cancer, or 4 or more adenomas.', 'Having 3 or more adenomas on initial colonoscopy with at least 1 measuring 1 cm or larger greatly increased the chance of a significant finding on the first surveillance colonoscopy. Conversely, patients with 1 or 2 adenomas all measuring less than 1 cm were at extremely low risk of an important outcome within 3 years.\Question: Are adenoma size and number predictive of adenoma recurrence : implications for surveillance colonoscopy?
Example Output:
Patients with 1 or 2 adenomas all measuring less than 1 cm are an identified low risk group and their first surveillance examination may be delayed beyond the standard 3 years.