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: Candida auris has emerged in the past decade as a multi-drug resistant public health threat causing health care outbreaks. Here we report epidemiological, clinical, and microbiological investigations of a C. auris outbreak in a regional Omani hospital between April 2018 and April 2019. The outbreak started in the intensive care areas (intensive care unit (ICU), coronary care unit (CCU), and high dependency unit) but cases were subsequently diagnosed in other medical and surgical units. In addition to the patients' clinical and screening samples, environmental swabs from high touch areas and from the hands of 35 staff were collected. All the positive samples from patients and environmental screening were confirmed using MALDI-TOF, and additional ITS-rDNA sequencing was done for ten clinical and two environmental isolates. There were 32 patients positive for C. auris of which 14 (43.8%) had urinary tract infection, 11 (34.4%) had candidemia, and 7 (21.8%) had asymptomatic skin colonization. The median age was 64 years (14-88) with 17 (53.1%) male and 15 (46.9%) female patients. Prior to diagnosis, 21 (65.6%) had been admitted to the intensive care unit, and 11 (34.4%) had been nursed in medical or surgical wards. The crude mortality rate in our patient's cohort was 53.1. Two swabs collected from a ventilator in two different beds in the ICU were positive for C. auris. None of the health care worker samples were positive. Molecular typing showed that clinical and environmental isolates were genetically similar and all belonged to the South Asian C. auris clade I. Most isolates had non-susceptible fluconazole (100%) and amphotericin B (33%) 
 Title: Ongoing Challenges with Healthcare-Associated Candida auris Outbreaks in Oman
answer:
False


question:
Paragraph: BACKGROUND: Study of human coronavirus and other virus-associated respiratory illnesses is needed to describe their clinical effects on chronically ill, older adults. METHODS: A prospective study during 2009 to 2013 clinically assessed acute respiratory illnesses soon after onset and 3 to 4 weeks later in patients aged !60 years with chronic lung and heart diseases (group 1, 100 subjects) and healthy adults aged 18 to 40 years (group 2, 101 subjects). Respiratory secretions were tested for nucleic acids of a panel of respiratory viruses. An increase in antibody titer was assessed for 4 coronavirus strains. : Virus-associated illnesses (29 [39.1%] of 74 illnesses in group 1 and 59 [48.7%] of 121 illnesses in group 2) occurred in all calendar quarters, most commonly in the first and fourth quarters. Coronaviruses (group 1: 14 [18.9%] illnesses; group 2: 26 [21.5%] illnesses) and enteroviruses/rhinoviruses (group 1: 14 [18.9%] illnesses; group 2: 37 [30.6%] illnesses) were most common. Virus co-infections occurred in 10 illnesses. Illnesses with 9 to 11 symptoms were more common in group 1 (17 [23.0%]) than in group 2 (15 [12.4%]) (P < .05). Compared with group 2, more group 1 subjects reported dyspnea, more severe disease of longer duration, and treatment for acute illness with prednisone and antibiotics. Coronavirusassociated illnesses (percent of illnesses, group 1 vs group 2) were characterized by myalgias (21% vs 68%, P < .01), chills (50% vs 52%), dyspnea (71% vs 24%, P < .01), headache (64% vs 72%), malaise (64% vs 84%), cough (86% vs 68%), sputum production (86% vs 60%), sore throat (64% vs 80%), and nasal congestion (93% vs 96%). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory illnesses were commonly associated with coronaviruses and enteroviruses/ rhinoviruses affecting chronically ill, older patients more than healthy, young adults. Published by Elsevier Inc. 
 Title: Coronavirus and Other Respiratory Illnesses Comparing Older with Young Adults
answer:
True


question:
Paragraph: The presentation and delivery of antigens are crucial for inducing immunity and, desirably, lifelong protection. Recombinant viral vectors-proven safe and successful in veterinary vaccine applications-are ideal shuttles to deliver foreign proteins to induce an immune response with protective antibody levels by mimicking natural infection. Some examples of viral vectors are adenoviruses, measles virus, or poxviruses. The required attributes to qualify as a vaccine vector are as follows: stable insertion of coding sequences into the genome, induction of a protective immune response, a proven safety record, and the potential for large-scale production. The need to develop new vaccines for infectious diseases, increase vaccine accessibility, reduce health costs, and simplify overloaded immunization schedules has driven the idea to combine antigens from the same or various pathogens. To protect effectively, some vaccines require multiple antigens of one pathogen or different pathogen serotypes/serogroups in combination (multivalent or polyvalent vaccines). Future multivalent vaccine candidates are likely to be required for complex diseases like malaria and HIV. Other novel strategies propose an antigen combination of different pathogens to protect against several diseases at once (multidisease or multipathogen vaccines). 
 Title: Multivalent and Multipathogen Viral Vector Vaccines
answer:

False