In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Context: The present study investigated the effects of continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) over primary somatosensory (SI) and motor (M1) cortices on motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) and short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI).', 'MEPs and SAI were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the right hand following 30Hz cTBS over left-hemisphere SI and M1 delivered to the same participants in separate sessions. Measurements were taken before and up to 60min following cTBS.', 'CTBS over M1 suppressed MEPs and did not alter SAI. In contrast cTBS over SI facilitated MEPs and decreased median and digital nerve evoked SAI.\Question: Does continuous theta-burst stimulation over primary somatosensory cortex modulate short-latency afferent inhibition?
These findings indicate that SAI amplitude is influenced by cTBS over SI but not M1, suggesting an important role for SI in the modulation of this circuit. These data provide further evidence that cTBS over SI versus M1 has opposite effects on corticospinal excitability.

Context: The present study aimed to identify the relationship between glycemic variability (GV) and the 10-y risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with good glycemic control.', 'Two-hundred forty consecutive T2DM patients (HbA1c≤7.0%) without CVD were included to calculate the 10-y CVD risk by Framingham risk score (FRS), and divided into 3 groups: low-risk group (FRS≤10%), intermediate-risk group (>10%, ≤20%) and high-risk group (>20%). Inter-group differences of GV were determined by comparing the SD of blood glucose (SDBG), mean amplitudes of glycemic excursion (MAGE), and mean of daily differences (MODD) gathered from 72-h continuous glucose monitoring system.', 'The levels of SDBG and MAGE significantly increased along with the raises of 10-y CVD risk of T2DM patients (p<0.01). FRS was positively correlated with age, systolic blood pressure, SDBG and MAGE (r=0.717, 0.525, 0.509 and 0.485 respectively, p<0.01), while negatively correlated with the level of HDL-C (r=-0.348, p<0.01). Furthermore, multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed that increased MAGE [OR: 1.623(1.198-2.316), p<0.001] and patients with high urine albumin excretion rates [OR: 1.743(1.247-2.793), p<0.001] were independent predictors for high 10-y CVD risk.\Question: Is glycemic variability evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring system associated with the 10-y cardiovascular risk of diabetic patients with well-controlled HbA1c?
GV predicts independently the 10-y CVD risk of T2DM patients with well-controlled HbA1c.

Context: The Royal College of Physicians (RCPL) National Early Warning Score (NEWS) escalates care to a doctor at NEWS values of ≥5 and when the score for any single vital sign is 3.', "We calculated the 24-h risk of serious clinical outcomes for vital signs observation sets with NEWS values of 3, 4 and 5, separately determining risks when the score did/did not include a single score of 3. We compared workloads generated by the RCPL's escalation protocol and for aggregate NEWS value alone.", "Aggregate NEWS values of 3 or 4 (n=142,282) formed 15.1% of all vital signs sets measured; those containing a single vital sign scoring 3 (n=36,207) constituted 3.8% of all sets. Aggregate NEWS values of either 3 or 4 with a component score of 3 have significantly lower risks (OR: 0.26 and 0.53) than an aggregate value of 5 (OR: 1.0). Escalating care to a doctor when any single component of NEWS scores 3 compared to when aggregate NEWS values ≥5, would have increased doctors' workload by 40% with only a small increase in detected adverse outcomes from 2.99 to 3.08 per day (a 3% improvement in detection).\Question: Are aggregate National Early Warning Score ( NEWS ) values more important than high scores for a single vital signs parameter for discriminating the risk of adverse outcomes?

The recommended NEWS escalation protocol produces additional work for the bedside nurse and responding doctor, disproportionate to a modest benefit in increased detection of adverse outcomes. It may have significant ramifications for efficient staff resource allocation, distort patient safety focus and risk alarm fatigue. Our findings suggest that the RCPL escalation guidance warrants review.