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.

Example input: Paragraph: "Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release.". Claim: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Example output: We really don't understand why only a handful of mainstream news organizations reported this story. (At least in what we found.) The most common emergency surgery in the world. Rushing to emergency surgery may not carry any benefit. Waiting a few hours may be safer and less expensive. Why is that not a story? We applaud USA Today for finding time and space and clearly it didn't need to free up much space to do a good job telling the story. The story explains that as many as 300,0 appendectomies are done each year in the US. That figure alone explains why this is an important study to report.
Example explanation: The output is an analysis of the claim while considering the paragraph as a reference. The output highlights the key features presented in the paragraph and explains the claim accordingly.
Q: Paragraph: Maxwell, 31, started the Australian summer season in strong form when he hit 62 runs off just 28 balls against Sri Lanka on Sunday and executed a run-out from near the Adelaide Oval boundary. Australia won that match by 134 runs and the second on Wednesday by nine wickets, when Maxwell wasn't required to bat, to clinch the three-match series. Maxwell met with Cricket Australia staff on Wednesday, and is expected to miss the rest of the T20 internationals against Sri Lanka on Friday in Melbourne and against Pakistan in three matches next week. Team psychologist Dr. Michael Lloyd said Thursday that Maxwell "has been experiencing some difficulties with regards to his mental health. As a result, he will spend a short time away from the game ... Glenn was proactive in identifying these issues and engaging with support staff." Australia coach Justin Langer said he approached Maxwell before Sunday's match. "There's been a few times over the last 12 months where I've probably suspected that he's been battling a little bit," Langer said. "The day before the game in Adelaide he didn't seem to have his normal zip and enthusiasm, although he still worked hard. "People in public positions have to put on a mask and that's the mask he puts on. He's the great entertainer, but underneath the mask I could probably just sense he wasn't quite right." D'Arcy Short has been chosen as a replacement player and will join the Australian T20 squad on Friday ahead of the final Sri Lanka match. ___ More AP cricket: www.apnews.com/cricket and https://twitter.com/AP_Sports Claim: Cricketer Maxwell to take break due to mental health issues.
A:
Cricket Australia says batsman Glenn Maxwell will take a break from the game to deal with mental health issues.