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: As infectious disease outbreaks emerge, public health agencies often enact vaccination and social distancing measures to slow transmission. Their success depends on not only strategies and resources, but also public adherence. Individual willingness to take precautions may be influenced by global factors, such as news media, or local factors, such as infected family members or friends. Here, we compare three modes of epidemiological decisionmaking in the midst of a growing outbreak using network-based mathematical models that capture plausible heterogeneity in human contact patterns. Individuals decide whether to adopt a recommended intervention based on overall disease prevalence, the proportion of social contacts infected, or the number of social contacts infected. While all strategies can substantially mitigate transmission, vaccinating (or self isolating) based on the number of infected acquaintances is expected to prevent the most infections while requiring the fewest intervention resources. Unlike the other strategies, it has a substantial herd effect, providing indirect protection to a large fraction of the population. misinformation from the "anti-vaxxer" movement [8, [11] [12] [13] . Recently, there have been calls for a special government commission on vaccine safety, despite overwhelming scientific consensus that vaccines are both safe and effective [12, [14] [15] [16] . As outbreaks unfold, people can take a variety precautionary measures to avoid infection, including immunization and social distancing [1, [17] [18] [19] . They often judge personal risk based on their impressions of overall disease prevalence and severity [2, [20] [21] [22] [23] . When infection risk appears low, small risks of adverse effects from the vaccine can seem relatively important and cause vaccine coverage to drop below levels required to control transmission. A variety of other factors can influence the perceived utility of disease prevention, including epidemiological news and rumors, costs of vaccination and other control measures, trust in health professionals, government agencies, media and non-official information sources, as well as societal pressure to ensure the health of one's children [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] . Studies have shown that media reports about outbreaks that specify numbers of cases, hospitalizations or deaths, can influence avoidance behavior and contact patterns at both individual and community levels. In some cases, oversimplified or erroneous media reports regarding flawed vaccines can trigger panic and increases in vaccine hesitancy [30] [31] [32] [33] . For both seasonal and pandemic influenza, such interactions between vaccination decision-making and transmission dynamics can profoundly shape the course of epidemics [20, [34] [35] [36] . Individual intervention decisions can have far-reaching effects. For example, vaccination protects not only the immunized individual, but also social contacts who might have been infected by the individual. Social distancing decisions may break chains of transmission by protecting the decision-maker and more generally disrupting social dynamics. Following [37, 38] , we refer to this indirect protection as a herd effect. Although previously equated to the reduction in incidence in the unimmunized population [38], we quantify the herd effect of an intervention effort by estimating the number of infections averted per vaccine administered (or per individual social distancing action). The general phenomenon in which individual intervention actions reduce the risk of infection to others has also been called vaccination efficiency, vaccination effectiveness, herd immunity, and indirect protection [37] [38] [39] [40] . The magnitude of the herd effect will critically depend on contact patterns [41, 42]. Measures taken by gregarious individuals may have greater immediate benefits than those taken by solitary individuals, with downstream epidemiological consequences modulated by the full social network [43, 44] . Contact patterns may also influence the decision-making process itself, by constraining epidemiological perspectives. When gauging infection risk, individuals may consider global information (e.g., from news media) or local first-hand encounters with disease (e.g., infected acquaintances, friends or family members) [30, 31] . While traditional compartmental models assume homogeneity in both epidemiological risks and intervention benefits, network-based models provide a tractable framework for studying the complex interplay between contact networks, intervention decision making and disease transmission [34, [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] . Here, we investigate the epidemiological impacts of different decision paradigms using a network-based SIR epidemic model, in which individuals also make vaccination or social distancing choices based on their perceived epidemiological risks. Depending on the decision model, they estimate either overall disease prevalence, their number of infected social contacts, or their fraction of infected social contacts. When the perceived threat is sufficiently high, they take a measure that immediately affords full protection for the duration of the epidemic. We compare the efficacy of these three different paradigms across a range of diseases in a realistically heterogeneous network, and show that the most naive model-simply counting one's infected contacts-affords the most epidemiological protection using the least amount of resources (e.g., vaccinations or economic costs associated with social distancing). Local risk perception enhances epidemic control PLOS ONE | https://doi. 
 Title: Local risk perception enhances epidemic control

A: True
****
Q: Paragraph: Introduction-HIV-1 uses a programmed -1 ribosomal frameshift to generate Gag-Pol, the precursor of its enzymes, when its full-length mRNA is translated by the ribosomes of the infected cells. This change in the reading frame occurs at a so-called slippery sequence that is followed by a specific secondary structure, the frameshift stimulatory signal. This signal controls the frameshift efficiency. The synthesis of HIV-1 enzymes is critical for the virus replication and therefore, the -1 ribosomal frameshift could be the target of novel antiviral drugs. Areas covered-This review examines various approaches used to select drugs interfering with the -1 frameshift of HIV-1. These include the selection and modification of chemical compounds that specifically bind to the frameshift stimulatory signal, the use of antisense oligonucleotides targeting this signal and the selection of compounds that modulate HIV-1 frameshift, by using bicistronic reporters where the expression of the second cistron depends upon HIV-1 frameshift. Expert opinion-The most promising approach is the selection and modification of compounds specifically targeting HIV-1 frameshift stimulatory signal. The use of antisense oligonucleotides binding to the frameshift stimulatory signal is still questionable. The use of bicistronic reporters preferentially selects compounds that modulate the frameshift by targeting the ribosomes, which is less promising. 
 Title: Targeting frameshifting in the human immunodeficiency virus

A: True
****
Q: Paragraph: Martinez, M.L. and Weiss, R.C., 1993. Detection of feline infectious peritonitis virus in cell cultures and peripheral blood mononuclear leukocytes of experimentally infected cats using a biotinylated eDNA probe. Vet. Microbiol. 34: 259-271. A dot blot hybridization assay, using a biotinylated cDNA probe, was able to detect feline infectious peritonitis virus (F1PV) RNA in Felis catus whole fetus (fcwf-4) cells infected with the F1PV isolates DF2, 79-1146, UCDI, and UCD2. The probe cross-hybridized in the dot blot assay with nucleic acid of a closely related feline coronavirus, feline enteric coronavirus (FECV)-79-1683. To construct the probe, a 2.5 kilobase cDNA, prepared from FIPV-DF2 genomic RNA, was molecularly cloned. The recombinant cDNA clone was digested with the restriction endonuclease Rsa I, and an 870 basepair Rsa 1 fragment was isolated from vector DNA by agarose electrophoresis and glassmilk purification. This fragment was complementary to the 3' three fourths of the nucleocapsid gene. The hybridization probe was prepared by random primed labeling in the presence of biotin-I 1-dUTP. Using an avidinalkaline phosphatase conjugate and chemilumineseent substrate detection system, virus could be detected in as few as 3000 infected cells. In an in vivo study, the probe was used to detect FIPV RNA in peripheral blood mononuclear leukocytes (PBML) isolated at various post-infection days (PID) from cats experimentally infected with the FIP-producing coronavirus isolate FIPV-79-1146 or FIPV-DF2. Viral RNA could be detected in as few as 12 000 PBML isolated from cats at PID 7 and in 50 000 PBML at PID 22. There was no consistent pattern, however, between hybridization results and prognosis or severity of disease at the time of sampling. Despite some cross-hybridization with FECV RNA, this probe should be useful for diagnosis of FIP, because cats infected with FECV most likely do not become viremic. 
 Title: Detection of feline infectious peritonitis virus infection in cell cultures and peripheral blood mononuclear leukocytes of experimentally infected cats using a biotinylated eDNA probe

A:
False
****