instruction:
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".
question:
Paragraph: Estimating the case-fatality risk (CFR)-the probability that a person dies from an infection given that they are a case-is a high priority in epidemiologic investigation of newly emerging infectious diseases and sometimes in new outbreaks of known infectious diseases. The data available to estimate the overall CFR are often gathered for other purposes (e.g., surveillance) in challenging circumstances. We describe two forms of bias that may affect the estimation of the overall CFR-preferential ascertainment of severe cases and bias from reporting delays-and review solutions that have been proposed and implemented in past epidemics. Also of interest is the estimation of the causal impact of specific interventions (e.g., hospitalization, or hospitalization at a particular hospital) on survival, which can be estimated as a relative CFR for two or more groups. When observational data are used for this purpose, three more sources of bias may arise: confounding, survivorship bias, and selection due to preferential inclusion in surveillance datasets of those who are hospitalized and/or die. We illustrate these biases and caution against causal interpretation of differential CFR among those receiving different interventions in observational datasets. Again, we discuss ways to reduce these biases, particularly by estimating outcomes in smaller but more systematically defined cohorts ascertained before the onset of symptoms, such as those identified by forward contact tracing. Finally, we discuss the circumstances in which these biases may affect non-causal interpretation of risk factors for death among cases. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases | 
 Title: Potential Biases in Estimating Absolute and Relative Case-Fatality Risks during Outbreaks
answer:
False


question:
Paragraph: Background: Based on clinical representation of disease symptoms multiple sclerosis (MScl) patients can be divided into two major subtypes; relapsing remitting (RR) MScl (85-90%) and primary progressive (PP) MScl (10-15%). Proteomics analysis of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) has detected a number of proteins that were elevated in MScl patients. Here we specifically aimed to differentiate between the PP and RR subtypes of MScl by comparing CSF proteins. Methodology/Principal Findings: CSF samples (n = 31) were handled according to the same protocol for quantitative mass spectrometry measurements we reported previously. In the comparison of PP MScl versus RR MScl we observed a number of differentially abundant proteins, such as protein jagged-1 and vitamin D-binding protein. Protein jagged-1 was over three times less abundant in PP MScl compared to RR MScl. Vitamin D-binding protein was only detected in the RR MScl samples. These two proteins were validated by independent techniques (western blot and ELISA) as differentially abundant in the comparison between both MScl types. 
 Title: Proteomics Comparison of Cerebrospinal Fluid of Relapsing Remitting and Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
answer:
True


question:
Paragraph: Objective: To survey fertility patients' agreement with ASRM recommendations during the pandemic and the emotional impact on them. Design: An online survey was sent to current fertility patients Setting: New York City academic fertility practice at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic Patient(s): Fertility patients seen within the last year Intervention(s): None Main Outcome Measures(s): Patient agreement with the ASRM recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic and the emotional impact rated on a Likert scale. Result(s): A total of 518 patients completed the survey for a response rate of 17%. Fifty percent of respondents had a cycle canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Of those who had a cycle cancelled, 85% of respondents found it to be moderately to extremely upsetting with 22% rating it to be equivalent to the loss of a child. There was no difference on the emotional impact based on the type of cycle cancelled. Fifty-five percent of patients agreed that diagnostic procedures such as hysterosalpingograms should be cancelled while 36% of patients agreed all fertility cycles should be cancelled. Patients were slightly more likely to agree with the ASRM guidelines if they have an upcoming cycle cancelled (p = 0.041). Of all respondents 82% would have preferred to have the option to start a treatment cycle in consultation with their doctor. 
 Title: THE EMOTIONAL IMPACT OF THE ASRM GUIDELINES ON FERTILITY PATIENTS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
answer:

True