instruction:
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: Despite the significant role of seasonal influenza vaccination in preventing and minimizing the serious complications of influenza infection in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients, unsatisfactory compliance still exists for vaccination. Study objectives were to explore the vaccination status and determinants in T2DM patients in southwestern Saudi Arabia. A cross-sectional study on a representative sample of T2DM patients in Abha city, southwestern Saudi Arabia, was conducted. Data for sociodemographic characteristics, clinical criteria, vaccination status, vaccination motivators and barriers and seasonal influenza knowledge were collected. Out of 353 T2DM patients included in the study, seasonal influenza vaccination coverage was 61% in year 2017. A significant factors associated with non-vaccination were; poor influenza and its vaccine knowledge (OR = 4.31, 95% CI: 2.73-6.80), illiteracy (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.11-3.37), and more than 10 years disease duration (OR = 2.07, 95% CI: 1.11-3.87). Presence of family history of DM and ischemic heart comorbidity minimized the possibility of non-vaccination (OR = 0.54 and 0.28 respectively). Healthcare givers' advice was the most reported vaccination motivator (84.7%) while; fear of vaccine side effects was the most stated barrier (73%). In conclusion, influenza vaccination rate among T2DM in the present study is less than the recommended level. Continuous primary health care center-based educational programs should be implemented to aware and encourage influenza vaccination among T2DM patients.
Title: Influenza Vaccination in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: Coverage Status and Its Determinants in Southwestern Saudi Arabia
answer:
True

question:
Paragraph: Coronaviruses (CoVs) are positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses and contain the largest known RNA genomes, ranging from 27 to 32 kilobases in length. CoVs are capable of transspecies movement as evidenced by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) epidemic in 2002-2003 [1,2]. Additionally, the emergence of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012 demonstrates that CoVs continue to cause severe and lethal human disease [3] . Exactly how CoVs maintain the integrity of their large genomes while generating the population diversity required for emergence and adaptation has been a major question in RNA virology. The discovery of 39-to-59 exoribonuclease (ExoN) activity within CoV nonstructural protein 14 (nsp14-ExoN), which is critical for CoV high-fidelity replication, has challenged the long-held paradigm that RNA viruses cannot proofread and raises the possibility of an entirely new model for how RNA viruses regulate replication fidelity. We will summarize: 1) the data supporting proofreading during CoV replication; 2) the possibility of a multi-protein fidelity complex, using E. coli DNA polymerase III as a conceptual framework; and 3) the promise of genetic and therapeutic interference with fidelity regulation as an approach for attenuation and treatment of CoVs.
Title: Coronaviruses as DNA Wannabes: A New Model for the Regulation of RNA Virus Replication Fidelity
answer:
True

question:
Paragraph: Background: The first cases of influenza A/H1N1 (swine flu) were confirmed in the UK on 27th April 2009, after a novel virus first identified in Mexico rapidly evolved into a pandemic. The swine flu outbreak was the first pandemic in more than 40 years and for many, their first encounter with a major influenza outbreak. This study examines public understandings of the pandemic, exploring how people deciphered the threat and perceived they could control the risks. Methods: Purposive sampling was used to recruit seventy three people (61 women and 12 men) to take part in 14 focus group discussions around the time of the second wave in swine flu cases. Results: These discussions showed that there was little evidence of the public over-reacting, that people believed the threat of contracting swine flu was inevitable, and that they assessed their own self-efficacy for protecting against it to be low. Respondents assessed a greater risk to their health from the vaccine than from the disease. Such findings could have led to apathy about following the UK Governments recommended health protective behaviours, and a sub-optimal level of vaccine uptake. More generally, people were confused about the difference between seasonal influenza and swine flu and their vaccines. Conclusions: This research suggests a gap in public understandings which could hinder attempts to communicate about novel flu viruses in the future. There was general support for the government's handling of the pandemic, although its public awareness campaign was deemed ineffectual as few people changed their current hand hygiene practices. There was less support for the media who were deemed to have over-reported the swine flu pandemic.
Title: Public views of the uk media and government reaction to the 2009 swine flu pandemic
answer:
True