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.

Example Input: Context: To test whether oral L-81 treatment could improve the condition of mice with diabetes and to investigate how L-81 regulates microsomal triglyceride transfer protein (MTP) activity in the liver.', 'Genetically diabetic (db/db) mice were fed on chow supplemented with or without L-81 for 4 wk. The body weight, plasma glucose level, plasma lipid profile, and adipocyte volume of the db/db mice were assessed after treatment. Toxicity of L-81 was also evaluated. To understand the molecular mechanism, HepG2 cells were treated with L-81 and the effects on apolipoprotein B (apoB) secretion and mRNA level of the MTP gene were assessed.', 'Treatment of db/db mice with L-81 significantly reduced and nearly normalized their body weight, hyperphagia and polydipsia. L-81 also markedly decreased the fasting plasma glucose level, improved glucose tolerance, and attenuated the elevated levels of plasma cholesterol and triglyceride. At the effective dosage, little toxicity was observed. Treatment of HepG2 cells with L-81 not only inhibited apoB secretion, but also significantly decreased the mRNA level of the MTP gene. Similar to the action of insulin, L-81 exerted its effect on the MTP promoter.\Question: Does pluronic L-81 ameliorate diabetic symptoms in db/db mice through transcriptional regulation of microsomal triglyceride transfer protein?
Example Output: L-81 represents a promising candidate in the development of a selective insulin-mimetic molecule and an anti-diabetic agent.

Example Input: Context: Trauma centers are currently benchmarked on mortality outcomes alone. However, pay-for-performance measures may financially penalize centers based on complications. Our objective was to determine whether the results would be similar to the current standard method of mortality-based benchmarking if trauma centers were profiled on complications.', 'We analyzed data from the National Trauma Data Bank from 2007 to 2010. Patients 16 years or older with blunt or penetrating injuries and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 9 or higher were included. Risk-adjusted observed-to-expected (O/E) mortality ratios for each center were generated and used to rank each facility as high, average, or low performing. We similarly ranked facilities on O/E morbidity ratios defined as occurrence of any major complication. Concordance between hospital performance rankings was evaluated using a weighted statistic. Correlation between morbidity- and mortality-based O/E ratios was assessed using Pearson coefficients. Sensitivity analyses were performed to mitigate the competing risk of death for the morbidity analyses.', 'A total of 449,743 patients from 248 facilities were analyzed. The unadjusted morbidity and mortality rates were 10.0% and 6.9%, respectively. No correlation was found between morbidity- and mortality-based O/E ratios (r = -0.01). Only 40% of the centers had similar performance rankings for both mortality and morbidity. Of the 31 high performers for mortality, only 11 centers were also high performers for morbidity. A total of 78 centers were ranked as average, and 11 ranked as low performers on both outcomes. Comparison of hospital performance status using mortality and morbidity outcomes demonstrated poor concordance (weighted = 0.03, p = 0.22).\Question: Does benchmarking trauma centers on mortality alone reflect quality of care : implications for pay-for-performance?
Example Output: Mortality-based external benchmarking does not identify centers with high complication rates. This creates a dichotomy between current trauma center profiling standards and measures used for pay-for-performance. A benchmarking mechanism that reflects all measures of quality is needed.

Example Input: Context: To document potential mediating effects of the Activator-assisted spinal manipulative therapy (ASMT) on pain and hyperalgesia after acute intervertebral foramen (IVF) inflammation.', 'The IVF inflammation was mimicked by in vivo delivery of inflammatory soup directly into the L5 IVF in adult male Sprague-Dawley rats. Thermal hyperalgesia and mechanical allodynia were determined by the shortened latency of foot withdrawal to radiant heat and von Frey filament stimulation to the hind paw, respectively. Intracellular recordings were obtained in vitro from L5 dorsal root ganglion (DRG) somata. DRG inflammation was examined by observation of the appearance and hematoxylin and eosin staining. ASMT was applied to the spinous process of L4, L5, and L6. A series of 10 adjustments were initiated 24 hours after surgery and subsequently applied daily for 7 consecutive days and every other day during the second week.', '(1) ASMT applied on L5, L6, or L5 and L6 spinous process significantly reduced the severity and duration of thermal and mechanical hyperalgesia produced by the IVF inflammation. However, ASMT applied on L4 did not affect the response in rats with IVF inflammation or the controls; (2) electrophysiological studies showed that hyperexcitability of the DRG neurons produced by IVF inflammation was significantly reduced by ASMT; (3) pathological studies showed that manifestations of the DRG inflammation, such as the increased vascularization and satellitosis, were significantly reduced 2 to 3 weeks after ASMT.\Question: Does spinal manipulation reduce pain and hyperalgesia after lumbar intervertebral foramen inflammation in the rat?
Example Output:
These studies show that ASMT can significantly reduce the severity and shorten the duration of pain and hyperalgesia caused by lumbar IVF inflammation. This effect may result from ASMT-induced faster elimination of the inflammation and recovery of excitability of the inflamed DRG neurons by improving blood and nutrition supplement to the DRG within the affected IVF. Manipulation of a specific spinal segment may play an important role in optimizing recovery from lesions involving IVF inflammation.