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".

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: The plaque assay has long served as the "gold standard" to measure virus infectivity and test antiviral drugs, but the assay is labor-intensive, lacks sensitivity, uses excessive reagents, and is hard to automate. Recent modification of the assay to exploit flow-enhanced virus spread with quantitative imaging has increased its sensitivity. Here we performed flow-enhanced infection assays in microscale channels, employing passive fluid pumping to inoculate cell monolayers with virus and drive infection spread. Our test of an antiviral drug (5-fluorouracil) against vesicular stomatitis virus infections of BHK cell monolayers yielded a two-fold improvement in sensitivity, relative to the standard assay based on plaque counting. The reduction in scale, simplified fluid handling, imagebased quantification, and higher assay sensitivity will enable infection measurements for high-throughput drug screening, sero-conversion testing, and patient-specific diagnosis of viral infections. 
 Title: Infection on a chip: a microscale platform for simple and sensitive cell-based virus assays

Output: True


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Cameron). Study objective: We compare the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of oral prednisolone/acetaminophen and oral indomethacin/acetaminophen combination therapy in the treatment of acute goutlike arthritis in patients presenting to an emergency department (ED). Methods: This is a double-blind, randomized, controlled study in a university hospital emergency department (ED) in the New Territories of Hong Kong. Patients older than 17 years and presenting between February 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004, with a clinical diagnosis of goutlike arthritis were randomized to receive either oral prednisolone/acetaminophen or oral indomethacin/acetaminophen combination therapy. Primary outcome measures were pain scores, time to resolution of symptoms and signs, and adverse effects. Secondary outcome measures were the need for additional acetaminophen and relapse rate. Results: There were 90 patients randomized: 46 patients to the indomethacin group and 44 patients to the prednisolone group. Baseline characteristics, including pain scores, were similar in the 2 groups. Both treatment groups had a similar decrease in pain score in the ED. The mean rate of decrease in pain score with activity for indomethacin was Ϫ1.7Ϯ1.6 (SD) mm per day and for prednisolone was Ϫ2.9Ϯ2.0 (SD) mm per day (mean difference 1.2 mm/day; 95% confidence interval 0.4 to 2.0 mm/day; Pϭ.0026). Although these differences were statistically significant, at no time was the difference in mean pain score greater than 13 mm. Therefore, it is unclear whether these differences are clinically significant. The mean total dose of acetaminophen consumed by the prednisolone group was significantly more than in the indomethacin group (mean 10.3 g, range 1 to 21 g versus mean 6.4 g, range 1 to 21 g). Twenty-nine patients in the indomethacin group and 12 patients in the prednisolone group experienced adverse effects (PϽ.05). The commonest adverse effects in the indomethacin group were nausea, indigestion, epigastric pain, dizziness, and gastrointestinal bleeding (Nϭ5; 11%). None of the patients in the prednisolone group developed gastrointestinal bleeding. The relapse rate for both groups was similar. Conclusion: In the treatment of acute goutlike arthritis, oral prednisolone/acetaminophen combination is as effective as oral indomethacin/acetaminophen combination in relieving pain but is associated with fewer adverse effects. 
 Title: Comparison of Oral Prednisolone/Paracetamol and Oral Indomethacin/Paracetamol Combination Therapy in the Treatment of Acute Goutlike Arthritis: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Output: False


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Diagnosis of the etiologic agent of respiratory viral infection relies traditionally on culture or antigen detection. This pilot was conducted evaluation comparing performance characteristics of the RT-PCR and Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry (RT-PCR/ESI-MS) platform to conventional virological methods for identifying multiple clinically relevant respiratory viruses in nasopharyngeal aspirates. The RT-PCR/ESI-MS respiratory virus surveillance kit was designed to detect respiratory syncytial virus, influenza A and B, parainfluenza types 1-4, adenoviridae types A-F, coronaviridae, human bocavirus, and human metapneumovirus. Patients (N=192) attending an emergency department during the 2007-8 respiratory season consented, and "excess" frozen archived nasopharyngeal aspirates were analysed; 46 were positive by conventional virology and 69 by RT-PCR/ESI-MS, among which there were six samples with multiple viral pathogens detected. The sensitivity and specificity of the assay were 89.1% and 80.3%, respectively. Additional viruses that were not identified by conventional virology assays were detected (4 human bocaviruses and 7 coronaviruses). Samples in which the RT-PCR/ESI-MS results disagreed with conventional virology were sent for analysis by a third method using a commercial RT-PCR-based assay, which can identify viruses not detectable by conventional virologic procedures. Time to first result of RT-PCR/ESI-MS was 8 hours. RT-PCR/ESI-MS demonstrated capacity to detect respiratory viruses identifiable and unidentifiable by conventional methods rapidly. 
 Title: Author manuscript; available in PMC


Output: True