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".
--------
Question: Paragraph: The À1 ribosomal frameshifting requires the existence of an in cis RNA slippery sequence and is promoted by a downstream stimulator RNA. An atypical RNA pseudoknot with an extra stem formed by complementary sequences within loop 2 of an H-type pseudoknot is characterized in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS CoV) genome. This pseudoknot can serve as an efficient stimulator for À1 frameshifting in vitro. Mutational analysis of the extra stem suggests frameshift efficiency can be modulated via manipulation of the secondary structure within the loop 2 of an infectious bronchitis virus-type pseudoknot. More importantly, an upstream RNA sequence separated by a linker 5 0 to the slippery site is also identified to be capable of modulating the À1 frameshift efficiency. RNA sequence containing this attenuation element can downregulate À1 frameshifting promoted by an atypical pseudoknot of SARS CoV and two other pseudoknot stimulators. Furthermore, frameshift efficiency can be reduced to half in the presence of the attenuation signal in vivo. Therefore, this in cis RNA attenuator represents a novel negative determinant of general importance for the regulation of À1 frameshift efficiency, and is thus a potential antiviral target. 
 Title: An atypical RNA pseudoknot stimulator and an upstream attenuation signal for À1 ribosomal frameshifting of SARS coronavirus

Answer: False


Question: Paragraph: Background: We undertook a 2X2 factorial, randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess whether vitamin D 3 supplementation (10,000 international units per week) versus placebo and gargling versus no gargling could prevent viral, clinical upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) in university students. Methods: We randomized 600 students into 4 treatment arms: 1) vitamin D 3 and gargling, 2) placebo and gargling, 3) vitamin D 3 and no gargling, and 4) placebo and no gargling. Students completed weekly electronic surveys and submitted self-collected mid-turbinate nasal flocked swabs during September and October in 2010 or 2011. Symptomatic students also completed an electronic symptom diary. The primary and secondary outcomes were the occurrence of symptomatic clinical URTI and laboratory confirmed URTI respectively. Results: Of 600 participants, 471 (78.5%) completed all surveys while 43 (7.2%) completed none; 150 (25.0%) reported clinical URTI. Seventy participants (23.3%) randomized to vitamin D 3 reported clinical URTI compared to 80 (26.7%) randomized to placebo (RR:0.79, CI 95 :0.61-1.03, p = 0.09). Eighty-five participants (28.3%) randomized to gargling reported clinical URTI compared to 65 participants (21.7%) randomized to the no gargling arm (RR:1.3, CI 95 :0.92-1.57, p = 0.19). Laboratory testing identified 70 infections (46.7 per 100 URTIs). Vitamin D 3 treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk for laboratory confirmed URTI (RR: 0.54, CI 95 :0.34-0.84, p = 0.007) and with a significantly lower mean viral load measured as log 10 viral copies/mL (mean difference: −0.89, CI 95: -1.7, −0.06, p = 0.04). Fewer students assigned to gargling experienced laboratory confirmed URTI, however this was not statistically significant (RR:0.82, CI 95 :0.53-1.26, p = 0.36). Conclusions: These results suggest that vitamin D 3 is a promising intervention for the prevention of URTI. Vitamin D 3 significantly reduced the risk of laboratory confirmed URTI and may reduce the risk of clinical infections. Trial registration: Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01158560. 
 Title: Vitamin D 3 and gargling for the prevention of upper respiratory tract infections: a randomized controlled trial

Answer: True


Question: Paragraph: The study aim was to investigate the prevalence and clinical relevance of viral findings by multiplex PCR from the nasopharynx of clinically septic patients during a winter season. During 11 weeks of the influenza epidemic period in January-March 2012, consecutive adult patients suspected to be septic (n = 432) were analyzed with cultures from blood and nasopharynx plus multiplex PCR for respiratory viruses on the nasopharyngeal specimen. The results were compared with those from microbiology analyses ordered as part of standard care. During the winter season, viral respiratory pathogens, mainly influenza A virus, human metapneumovirus, coronavirus, and respiratory syncytial virus were clinically underdiagnosed in 70% of patients positive by the multiplex PCR assay. During the first four weeks of the influenza epidemic, few tests for influenza were ordered by clinicians, indicating low awareness that the epidemic had started. Nasopharyngeal findings of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae by culture correlated to pneumonia diagnosis, and in those patients laboratory signs of viral coinfections were common but rarely suspected by clinicians. The role of respiratory viral infections in patients presenting with a clinical picture of sepsis is underestimated. Specific antiviral treatment might be beneficial in some cases and may reduce spread in a hospital setting. Diagnosing viral infections may promote reduction of unnecessary antibiotic use. It can also be a tool for decisions concerning patient logistics, in order to minimize exposure of susceptible patients and personnel. 
 Title: Respiratory viral infections are underdiagnosed in patients with suspected sepsis

Answer:
True