Q: 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.
Paragraph: The story describes the cost of the drug-coated stents compared to the older version, the bare metal stents. The story does report the risk of clotting with the drug-coated stents, however the comparison of coated and bare metal stents is the key piece of information that is missing in this story. This information should also be presented inabsolute rather than relative terms. The story adequately describes therisk of clotting with drug-coated stents and of bleeding with Plavix. The story does a good job of describing the strength of the available evidence, particularly the limitationsof using hospital registries as a source of data. By accurately describing the prevalence of restenosis, or narrowing of the artery after stenting, the story avoids disease mongering. The story quotes multiple experts who have differing perspectives on how the new information changes clinical practice. The story does mention alternatives such as bare metal stents, bypass surgery and medications. The story clearly states that drug-coated stents are common. The story clearly states that the drug-coated stents are new but have been widely used since they were introduced. Because the story quotes multiple independent sources the reader can assume that the story does not rely on a press release as the sole source of information. Claim: FDA Probes Safety of Popular Heart Stent
A:
When drug-coated or durg-eluting stents went on the market, they immediately changed clinical practice by replacing the standard bare metal stents. The purpose of the drug-coated stent was to prevent the clogged artery from becoming clogged again. However, new reports are emerging that these stents may actually be causing some clots to form. Enough evidence is mounting that the FDA convened a panel to discuss how these new developments will affect how stents are used in routine practice. This story does an excellent job of describing the scale of the problem andquoting multiple experts who fall on different sides of the debate. The story does a good job of describing the strength of the available evidence, particularly the limitationsof using hosptial registries as a source of data. By accurately describing the prevalence of coronary artery disease, the story avoids disease mongering. Furthermore, the story mentions alternatives such as bare metal stents, bypass surgery and medications. The story alsodescribes the cost of the drug-coated stents compared to the older version, the bare metal stents. The story does report the risk of clotting with the drug-coated stents, however the comparison of coated and bare metal stents is the key piece of information that is missing in this story. This information should also be presented inabsolute rather than relative terms. Overall, this was a balanced and comprehensive piece.