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 development and use of numerous animal models of human autoimmune diseases have provided important advances in our understanding of pathogenic mechanisms of disease and provided robust and reliable models to test novel therapeutic strategies. However, few preclinical studies of therapeutic treatments have demonstrated efficacy in the clinic, possibly because of the biological differences between humans and other animals. Although animal models of human disease are imperfect, it is important to understand the differences between the human disease and its animal models and to design experimental studies using animal models appropriately for the questions being asked. This review provides an overview of the currently used animal models of three human neuroimmunological diseases, multiple sclerosis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, and myasthenia gravis, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each model and how they correlate or differ from their human counterpart.
Title: Animal Models for the Study of Neuroimmunological Disease

Answer: True

Question: Paragraph: This paper describes the molecular detection of respiratory viruses from nasopharyngeal flocked swabs (flocked swabs) and nasopharyngeal washes (washes) in a clinical setting. Washes and flocked swabs collected from children < 3 years old hospitalized with a lower respiratory tract infection were tested for parainfluenza virus 1-3, respiratory syncytial virus, influenza A and B and metapneumovirus (Group 1) and adenovirus, rhinovirus and coronavirus (Group 2) using realtime reverse transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR). A consensuses standard was used to determine sensitivity and compare cycle thresholds (C T ) of washes and flocked swabs for each virus and group of viruses. Sensitivities ranged from 79 to 89% and 69 to 94% for flocked swabs and washes, respectively, excluding AdV which had a sensitivity of 35% for flocked swabs. When the flocked swabs and washes of Group 1 viruses were collected on the day of admission, the sensitivity of both sample types was 100%. Wash specimens had a lower C T value and higher sensitivity than flocked swabs; however there was no statistical difference in the sensitivity of a flocked swab (89%) versus wash (93%) for the detection of Group 1 viruses, particularly when samples were collected on the same day. Flocked swabs may be a useful alternative to washes for detection of respiratory viruses in clinical settings.
Title: Comparison of nasopharyngeal flocked swabs and nasopharyngeal wash collection methods for respiratory virus detection in hospitalized children using real-time polymerase chain reaction HHS Public Access

Answer: False

Question: Paragraph: The nucleoprotein-encoding gene (N) of murine hepatitis virus type 3 (MHV 3), from the Mill Hilt strain, was cloned and sequenced. It was compared to gene N from other routine coronaviruses and was found to share more similarities with N sequences from MHV 1 and MHV JHM strains than with the published MHV3 N sequence which is almost identical to MHVA59. We suggest that the evolution of some MHV N sequences resulted from a double recombination phenomenon between two ancestors. Furthermore, comparison of protein N from avian and mammalian coronaviruses leads to the hypothesis that horizontal transfer events of the virus from one host species to another have occurred.
Title: The gene encoding the nucleocapsid protein: sequence analysis in murine hepatitis virus type 3 and evolution in Coronaviridae

Answer:
True