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.

Example Input: Hepatic myofibroblasts are relevant for pathogenesis of S. mansoni infection. In normal liver, these perisinusoidal cells are quiescent, express the lipocyte phenotype, and are located in the Disse's space, being the major site of vitamin A storage. When activated, they convert to myofibroblasts and contribute to granulomatous and diffuse liver fibrosis. In the present work, we observed that myofibroblasts obtained from granulomatous periovular inflammatory reactions in schistosome-infected mice (GR-MF) produce in vitro immunomodulatory cytokines for eosinophil activation: IL-5 and eotaxin.", 'The secretory activity of GR-MF was detected after TGF-β and IL-13 stimulation using 2D and 3D cell culture systems. In a mixed co-culture system using GR-MF with hematopoietic bone marrow cells from infected mice, we observed eosinophil survival that was dependent upon IL-5 and eotaxin, since antibodies against this cytokines decreased eosinophil population, as measured by eosinophil peroxidase activity.
Example Output: Are hepatic myofibroblasts derived from Schistosoma mansoni-infected mice a source of IL-5 and eotaxin : controls of eosinophil populations in vitro?

Example Input: Thailand has the lowest incidence of gastric cancer in the world. Helicobacter pylori infection, a low serum pepsinogen I/II ratio, and interleukin (IL)-1beta-511 polymorphisms are suspected to be risk factors for gastric cancer.', 'A total of 167 Thais, comprising 56 cancer patients and 111 volunteers without cancer, underwent an esophagogastroduodenoscopic examination and three fixed-point biopsies; a cancer tissue biopsy was also done, and blood samples were collected. The subjects without cancer were divided into normal subjects and chronic gastritis patients. IL-1beta-511 polymorphisms were analyzed by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism, and the serum levels of pepsinogen I and II were determined by a radioimmunoassay. Helicobacter pylori IgG antibody and tissue pathology were tested in all groups.', 'The pepsinogen I/II ratio was significantly lower in the gastric cancer group than in the normal and chronic gastritis groups [odds ratio (OR), 2.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.10-4.80; P = 0.025]. Gastric cancer patients were positive for the H. pylori IgG antibody more frequently than negative (OR, 2.946; 95% CI, 1.4-6.39; P = 0.005). However, only 15 (27%) cancer patients were both positive for H. pylori IgG antibody and had low serum pepsinogen I/II. The C/C genotype was found more frequently in the gastric cancer group than in the group with a normal gastric mucosa (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.81; P = 0.014).
Example Output: Are helicobacter pylori infection in combination with the serum pepsinogen I/II ratio and interleukin-1beta-511 polymorphisms independent risk factors for gastric cancer in Thais?

Example Input: Active engagement in education improves learning outcomes. To enhance active participation in seminars, a student-centered course design was implemented and evaluated in terms of self-reported preparation, student motivation and exam scores. We hypothesized that small group learning with intensive peer interaction, using buzz-groups followed by plenary discussion, would motivate students to prepare seminar assignments at home and to actively engage in the seminars. Active engagement involved discussion of the preparatory assignments until consensus was reached.', "In total seven seminars were scheduled in a 10-week physiology course of an undergraduate Biomedical Sciences program. After each seminar, students were asked to fill out their perceptions of preparation and quality of the seminar (deepening of knowledge and confidence in answers) on a five-point scale using electronic questionnaires. Student motives were first collected using open questions. In the final questionnaire students were asked to indicate on a five-point scale how each motive was perceived. Students overall explanations why they had learned from seminars were collected via open questions in the final questionnaire. One hundred and twenty-four students of the cohort from November 2012 to February 2013 (82.6\xa0%) voluntarily participated. Students' motives to prepare and attend seminars were analyzed by inspection of descriptive statistics. Linear regression analysis was conducted to relate student preparation to the quality of seminars, seminar attendance to exam scores, and exam scores to the quality of seminars. Answers to open questions were deductively clustered.", "Studying the material, training for exams and comparing answers with peers motivated students to prepare the seminars. Students were motivated to participate actively because they wanted to keep track of correct answers themselves, to better understand the content and to be able to present their findings in plenary discussions. Perceived preparation of peers was positively associated with the perceived quality of seminars. Also, seminar attendance was positively associated with exam scores. Students' overall explanations suggest that discussing with peers and applying knowledge in pathophysiology cases underlies this association.
Example Output:
Is peer-instructed seminar attendance associated with improved preparation , deeper learning and higher exam scores : a survey study?