In this task, you're given a paragraph from the research paper and your task is to generate a suitable title for the research paper based on the given paper. Under 100 words is a good title length.

Ex Input:
Human rhinovirus (HRV) infections are common but poorly characterized in university students. Thus, we characterized asymptomatic and symptomatic HRV infections by incidence, species diversity, and viral load of 502 university students during September and October of 2010 and 2011 from nasal swabs and electronically submitted symptom questionnaires. We tested all symptomatic students and randomly sampled participants who remained asymptomatic (n = 25/week, over 8 weeks each study year) on a weekly basis by real-time PCR and sequenced HRV positives. HRV was identified in 33/400 (8.3%) and 85/92 (92.4%) of the asymptomatic and symptomatic students, respectively. We identified a higher than previously reported rate of HRV-B in both groups, although the distribution of HRV species was similar (P = 0.37). Asymptomatic viral load averaged 1.2 log 10 copies/mL lower than symptomatic HRV (P b 0.001). In conclusion, asymptomatic HRV activity preceded peak symptomatic activity in September and October and was associated with lower viral load.

Ex Output:
Comparison of asymptomatic and symptomatic rhinovirus infections in university students: incidence, species diversity, and viral load


Ex Input:
Faeces samples from 218, 1 to 30-day-old, diarrheic dairy calves in 65 dairy herds were screened for the presence of Cryptosporidium and concurrent infections with rotavirus, coronavirus, F5 Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. Calves were grouped according to their age as follows: 1±7, 8±14, 15±21 and 22±30 days. Cryptosporidium infection was detected in 43.8%, 71.9%, 63.2% and 6.9% of the calves in the respective age groups. Significant differences in the detection rate of Cryptosporidium were found between the age group 22±30 days and all other age groups, and between the age group 1±7 days and the age groups 8±14 days and 15±21 days. Cryptosporidium was the only enteropathogen detected in 60 of the 114 (52.6%) diarrheic calves. Concurrent infections with other enteropathogen(s) were detected in 64.3%, 46.3%, 39.5% and 0% of the Cryptosporidium-infected calves in the age groups 1±7, 8±14, 15±21 and 22±30 days, respectively. A significant age-associated decrease in the detection rate of mixed infections (p < 0.05) was found. The detection rates of the other enteropathogens considered in calves with Cryptosporidium infection were 87% for rotavirus, 11.1% for coronavirus, 27.8% for F5 E. coli and 1.8% for Salmonella. #

Ex Output:
Cryptosporidium and concurrent infections with other major enterophatogens in 1 to 30-day-old diarrheic dairy calves in central Spain


Ex Input:
The current Ebola virus outbreak has highlighted the uncertainties surrounding many aspects of Ebola virus virology, including routes of transmission. The scientific community played a leading role during the outbreak-potentially, the largest of its kind-as many of the questions surrounding ebolaviruses have only been interrogated in the laboratory. Scientists provided an invaluable resource for clinicians, public health officials, policy makers, and the lay public in understanding the progress of Ebola virus disease and the continuing outbreak. Not all of the scientific communication, however, was accurate or effective. There were multiple instances of published articles during the height of the outbreak containing potentially misleading scientific language that spurred media overreaction and potentially jeopardized preparedness and policy decisions at critical points. Here, we use articles declaring the potential for airborne transmission of Ebola virus as a case study in the inaccurate reporting of basic science, and we provide recommendations for improving the communication about unknown aspects of disease during public health crises. Basic scientific research is now considered an integral component of the fight against emerging infectious diseases like Ebola virus. The recent Ebola outbreak, however, demonstrates how the ineffective communication of basic science can stoke public panic more than it provides helpful tools to responders; basic science trades in probabilities and uncertainty, while public communication tends to favor more categorical claims. Here, we discuss the ethics of communicating scientific results, using, as a case study, the recent controversy over whether basic life sciences research demonstrates that Ebola could become transmissible via airborne respiratory droplet nuclei-popularly known as a virus becoming "airborne." We show how the science does not demonstrate this possibility, despite claims made in the popular and scientific press. We then recommend that uncertain scientific results in the context of public health crises ought to be communicated with humility, an emphasis on what is unknown, and a clear outline of the kinds of evidence that would give proof to controversial claims.

Ex Output:

Effectively Communicating the Uncertainties Surrounding Ebola Virus Transmission