TASK DEFINITION: Given a passage, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.
PROBLEM: In Australia, adult immunisation coverage is primarily monitored via periodic telephone surveys that rely on self-reported immunisation status. All Australian residents are eligible for Medicare, so we examined the feasibility of using immunisation-specific Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) item numbers to monitor and estimate adult influenza immunisation coverage.', 'Baseline questionnaire data from 267 129 participants from the 45 and Up Study, a prospective cohort study, were linked to data containing information on individual MBS immunisation-specific items from 2006 to 2011. Temporal trends in recording of these items were examined. Self-reported influenza immunisation status obtained from a follow-up questionnaire from 27 036 participants was then compared with the MBS immunisation records.', 'From 2006 to 2011, the pattern of MBS immunisation claims was consistent with self-reported influenza immunisation trends, with annual peaks occurring from March to May. There was fair agreement between MBS immunisation records and self-reported influenza immunisation: 48.8% (95% CI 47.1, 50.4) of participants who self-reported influenza immunisation had a matching MBS record, and 79.6% (95% CI 78.8, 80.4) who reported never having influenza immunisation had no matching MBS record. However, compared with self-reported influenza vaccination for people aged ≥65 years from the 2009 Adult Immunisation Telephone Survey (74.6%), the proportion of participants aged >65 years with an MBS immunisation record was low, with an annual median of 39.3% (range 28.3%-62.1%).

SOLUTION: Do medicare Benefits Schedule data to monitor influenza immunisation in Australian adults?

PROBLEM: To investigate the effects of copper on permeability and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) of Caco-2 cell monolayers.', 'The differentiated Caco-2 cell model was used in this study. Permeability of cell monolayers was reflected by monitoring transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER); distribution of tight junctional protein ZO-1 was measured by immunofluorescent staining; F actin was measured by fluorescence staining; and Activity of P-gp was reflected by changes of transcellular transport and accumulation of Rho-123 in Caco-2 cells.', "Apical treatment with copper (30 - 100 micromol/L, Hanks' buffered salt solution, up to 3 hours) induced a time- and concentration-dependent increase in permeability reflected by progressive decrease of TEER of Caco-2 cell monolayers, accompanied by deorganization of F actin, but without significant effects on tight junctional protein ZO-1; at a dose without any adverse effects on viability and permeability of Caco-2 monolayers, copper treatment (300 micromol/L, complete medium, 24 hours) decreased Papp(BL-->AP) from 7.37 +/- 0.20 x 10(-6) cm/s (controls) to (6.43 +/- 0.27) x 10(-6) cm/s, the increased Papp(AP-->BL) from (1.23 +/- 0.05) x 10(-7) cm/s (controls) to (3.41 +/- 0.08) x 10(-7) cm/s, and enhanced the intracellular Rho-123 from (0.31 +/- 0.01) nmol/filter (controls) to (0.50 +/- 0.03) nmol/filter.

SOLUTION: Does [ Copper treatment alter the barrier functions of human intestinal Caco-2 cells ]?

PROBLEM: Although the "right not to know" is well established in international regulations, it has been heavily debated. Ubiquitous results from extended exome and genome analysis have challenged the right not to know. American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) Recommendations urge to inform about incidental findings that pretend to be accurate and actionable. However, ample clinical cases raise the question whether these criteria are met. Many incidental findings are of uncertain significance (IFUS). The eager to feedback information appears to enter the field of IFUS and thereby threaten the right not to know. This makes it imperative to investigate the arguments for and against a right not to know for IFUS.

SOLUTION:
Is incidental findings of uncertain significance : To know or not to know -- that the question?