Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.

Example Input: Paragraph: Michelle Obama is visiting Tanzania on the last day of President Barack Obama’s eight-day tour of Africa. She helped Laura Bush open a summit of the wives of African leaders, saying Africa was “at the hub of global development”. The summit aims to promote women’s well-being on the continent. The unusual Obama-Bush combination spotlights U.S. interest in the continent and the importance of Africa to the legacy of the president and his predecessor George W. Bush. For Obama, his three-nation tour has given him a break from a row over spy agency eavesdropping and a chance to promote U.S. commercial interests to a receptive African audience. Bush, who launched a widely praised program to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa when in office, was due to join Obama for a ceremony to remember the victims of the 1998 U.S. embassy bombing in the Tanzanian capital. An expansion of a program to detect and treat cervical and breast cancer, Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon, is due to be announced on Wednesday, organizers said. Former President Bush is due to speak at the first ladies’ summit the same day. The United Nations and non-governmental groups, including Bush’s foundation, launched Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon to provide health services to women in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, building on the U.S. HIV/AIDS prevention program. Claim: Michelle Obama, Laura Bush spotlight Africa women's health.
Example Output: U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama and predecessor Laura Bush combined their star power to draw attention on Tuesday to efforts to improve women’s health and welfare in east Africa.

Example Input: Paragraph: The news release includes information about costs. We would have liked a little more context. The release states: “The costs associated with home infusion were also consistently lower than services provided in a health care facility, with savings ranging between $1,928 and $2,974 per course of treatment.” We need to know what percentage of savings that is per course of treatment. If the whole course costs $100,000, then saving $1,928 is a pretty small percentage. If the whole course is $10,000, than a savings of $1,928 looks more substantial. We found the news release skimmed over giving crucial numbers and metrics for benefits. Separate from the cost benefit to home infusion versus hospital or clinic infusion, the release should have given us some numbers for safety. Here is what the release stated (emphasis ours): “The research showed that patients receiving intravenous therapy at home had as good or better clinical outcomes as those patients who received the same therapy in a traditional health care setting. In addition, patients overwhelmingly preferred receiving their infusion therapies at home, reporting fewer disruptions in personal schedules and responsibilities. We need numbers to demonstrate how “as good” the clinical outcomes were. We need numbers to represent “overwhelmingly preferred.” By what percentage did what number of patients demonstrate preference? This is where the release could have taken some quantitative data from the study. The word “harms” does not appear in the news release. During intravenous infusions there are complications that may arise. The release does not mention harm, even to dismiss the probability as rare. The study being reported is a systematic literature review that only considered 13 prior studies. The release does not address the limitations of a literature review or give us the total number of patients represented by the 13 studies. Only 5 of the 13 studies used in the analysis addressed outcomes. One had no comparison group (“However, no adjustment for confounders was performed, and higher OPAT success rates were likely due to purposeful selection of younger, healthier patients for OPAT therapy,” according to the published study). In another study, “IPAT patients were selected from a time period during which OPAT was not available for any patients, minimizing selection bias by the matching fact.” In any case, less than half of the studies looked at outcome data and those that did involved different diseases from different time periods, some had control groups and some did not. We don’t think the evidence is strong enough to suggest outcomes were improved. The bias inherent in CVS employees culling the studies is also concerning. A better description of the review’s search and selection process may have helped allay any concerns about studies being cherry-picked. There is no disease mongering. The release is clear that the study was done by the CVS Health Research Institute. Since this is a news release from a profit-making company that operates directly to sell services under study, we hope the readers quickly understand there is an inherent conflict. This is the equivalent of a Coca Cola study about the benefits of drinking their product. The release explains the alternatives of clinic or hospital infusion compared to home infusion. Home infusion services are widely available. Their reimbursement is not widely available. The release says “clinical outcomes and quality of care have not previously been systematically evaluated.” The release doesn’t rely on any unreasonable or unjustified language. However, we do not think the news release proves the words used in the headline that say “Home Infusion Care Improves Patient Outcomes and Quality of Life While Reducing Overall Costs.” Based on a literature review, which does not randomize people into apples-to-apples comparison, you cannot claim to show better outcomes. The release does not offer any quantified benefits to support medical outcomes and doesn’t provide quantified information about quality of life improvement. The fact that patients prefer home infusion to travel to a clinic is not by itself a proof that their lives have been improved. As we wrote in the benefits section above — we are not given numbers to prove by what amount patients prefer home infusion. Claim: CVS Health Research Institute Study Shows that Home Infusion Care Improves Patient Outcomes and Quality of Life While Reducing Overall Costs
Example Output: This news release describes the cost savings and safety of home infusion services from 13 previously published studies compared with infusion services at a clinic or hospital. Home infusion appears safe and clinically effective while saving money in the studies reviewed, but the release does not address limits in the review. We aren’t given any numbers to back up the claims that clinical outcomes were equal and that patients preferred the home setting. The release notes that CVS has a home infusion business–Coram–so at least they make this transparent. We applaud CVS for attempting to quantify the cost savings and other potential benefits of the service — and the claim that there are advantages are likely valid — but some context/background from other, independent studies would be helpful. Besides the lack of quantification, the release doesn’t delve into the potential risks from using the home infusion service. Treatments for chronic diseases, which often require drugs administered through infusion, are one of the fastest growing costs in the US health care system. If patients can be served at home, rather than in outpatient clinics or hospitals, it saves both money and time. But outcomes studies, which compare outcomes and safety between locations, are essential to judging whether home infusion is equal to clinic or hospital infusion. This release does not go far enough with numbers to quantify benefits and risks. We also see that CVS has a conflict of interest, because they have a business arm, Coram, that sells home infusion services. It appears this release (and study) are getting attention just as Congress is “discussing how to implement a comprehensive home infusion benefit for Medicare beneficiaries.”

Example Input: Paragraph: His wife beat a more formidable challenger. Molly Crosby, a 32-year-old mother of five, had been dealing with bouts of coughing and congestion all summer. Some preliminary exams in Green Bay showed a spot on her right lung. That led the Crosbys to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., for additional tests. A carcinoid endocrine tumor was found. The tumor isn’t as dangerous as other forms of cancer but was disconcerting for an otherwise healthy, nonsmoker. “We found out the day before we reported to camp,” Crosby said on Wednesday. “We were at Mayo the two or three days leading up to training camp, when they did all their scans and got the final prognosis.” Crosby flew back to Green Bay for the start of training camp. After a subpar 2018 season, Crosby had to beat out Sam Ficken. Crosby managed to keep his focus and retained the job for a 13th season. “I’ve trained a long time in compartmentalizing different situations,” Crosby said. “Whenever I was home, I was fully home. The organization was unbelievable through training camp, just giving me time to be with Molly and be with the family and help where I could throughout the day and evening. I just tried to be fully in on both things. I have felt a lot of freedom in this. “I love doing what I’m doing but the importance of taking care of family and being there for Molly and the kids, when I look back on it, it was a special camp. I was able to really fully immerse in both things. It was nerve-wracking, too. Day in and day out, it was coming in, having to work and compete at a high level, and then going home and flowing back into a normal routine. Then, we’d sit down at night and you’d remember that surgery was coming and Molly had cancer. Those things were heavy.” That surgery was at the end of the preseason, with part of Molly’s right lung removed. While she will go back to Mayo for a scan in mid-October, Crosby said the doctors are positive they got rid of the tumor and she will not require radiation or chemotherapy. Since 2009, the NFL has held its annual “Crucial Catch” campaign to raise money for the American Cancer Society. It was a campaign that had already hit home for Crosby. A grandmother died of breast cancer and a sister-in-law is in her third year battling ovarian cancer. Now with his wife’s diagnosis, the fight against cancer has grown more meaningful. “That’s what it’s about is early detection,” he said. “It’s getting routine checkups. Don’t take it for granted. The numbers, with our technology, are amazing with prevention but treating it if you catch it early enough. That’s one of the big things is pushing that. Let’s try to get earlier detection so we can fight this thing. “With Molly’s cancer, it’s always been really important to me but I’m going to continue to push the charge forward and make sure that everybody gets the care. We feel so fortunate with the care that we got. Hopefully, everybody gets the same care and the same prognosis that we got.” The Packers (3-1) will play at the Dallas Cowboys (3-1) on Sunday. Some of Crosby’s finest professional moments have happened at AT&T Stadium. In the 2010 season, the Packers won the Super Bowl in Arlington. A playoff game in the 2016 season against the Cowboys marked the highlight of his career. His 56-yard field goal with 1:33 to play gave the Packers a 31-28 lead. Dallas tied the score, but Crosby booted a 51-yarder on the final play for a 34-31 victory. “The two minutes in that game were the most exciting two minutes I think I’ve ever had in a game,” he said. “To be able to execute it twice in that situation was awesome.” ___ More AP NFL: https://apnews.com/NFL and https://twitter.com/AP_NFL Claim: Wife’s cancer diagnosis hits home for Packers’ Crosby.
Example Output:
Mason Crosby won his competition to remain the Green Bay Packers’ kicker.