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".

[Q]: Paragraph: Most models of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States do not consider geographic variation, and their relevance to public policies is not straightforward. We developed a mathematical model that characterizes infections by state and incorporates inflows and outflows of interstate travelers. Modeling reveals that curbing interstate travel when the disease is already widespread will make little difference. Meanwhile, increased testing capacity (facilitating early identification of infected people and quick isolation) and strict social-distancing and self-quarantine rules are effective in abating the outbreak. The modeling has also produced state-specific information. For example, for New York and Michigan, isolation of persons exposed to the virus needs to be imposed within 2 days to prevent a broad outbreak, whereas for other states this period can be 3.6 days. This model could be used to determine resources needed before safely lifting state policies on social distancing.
Title: Mitigating COVID-19 outbreak via high testing capacity and strong transmission-intervention in the United States
[A]: True

[Q]: Paragraph: Background: Healthcare personnel often use incorrect technique for donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE). Objective: We tested the hypothesis that medical students receive insufficient training on correct methods for donning and doffing PPE. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students on clinical rotations at two teaching hospitals to determine the type of training they received in PPE technique. The students performed simulations of contaminated PPE removal with fluorescent lotion on gloves and were assessed for correct PPE technique and skin and/or clothing contamination. To obtain additional information on PPE training during medical education, residents, fellows, and attending physicians completed written questionnaires on PPE training received during medical school and on knowledge of PPE protocols recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Results: Of 27 medical students surveyed, only 11 (41%) reported receiving PPE training, and none had received training requiring demonstration of proficiency. During simulations, 25 of 27 (92.5%) students had one or more lapses in technique and 12 (44%) contaminated their skin with fluorescent lotion. For 100 residents, fellows and attending physicians representing 67 different medical schools, only 53% reported receiving training in use of PPE and only 39% selected correct donning and doffing sequence. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that there is a need for development of effective strategies to train medical students in correct use of PPE.
Title: Do medical students receive training in correct use of personal protective equipment?
[A]: True

[Q]: Paragraph: Background: Micro-organisms transmitted from vertebrate animalsincluding livestockto humans account for an estimated 60% of human pathogens. Micro-organisms can be transmitted through inhalation, ingestion, via conjunctiva or physical contact. Close contact with animals is crucial for transmission. The role of intensity and type of contact patterns between livestock and humans for disease transmission is poorly understood. In this systematic review we aimed to summarise current knowledge regarding patterns of human-livestock contacts and their role in micro-organism transmission. Methods: We included peer-reviewed publications published between 1996 and 2014 in our systematic review if they reported on human-livestock contacts, human cases of livestock-related zoonotic diseases or serological epidemiology of zoonotic diseases in human samples. We extracted any information pertaining the type and intensity of human-livestock contacts and associated zoonoses. Results: 1522 papers were identified, 75 were included: 7 reported on incidental zoonoses after brief animalhuman contacts (e.g. farm visits), 10 on environmental exposures and 15 on zoonoses in developing countries where backyard livestock keeping is still customary. 43 studies reported zoonotic risks in different occupations. Occupations at risk included veterinarians, culling personnel, slaughterhouse workers and farmers. For culling personnel, more hours exposed to livestock resulted in more frequent occurrence of transmission. Slaughterhouse workers in contact with live animals were more often positive for zoonotic micro-organisms compared to co-workers only exposed to carcasses. Overall, little information was available about the actual mode of micro-organism transmission. Conclusions: Little is known about the intensity and type of contact patterns between livestock and humans that result in micro-organism transmission. Studies performed in occupational settings provide some, but limited evidence of exposure response-like relationships for livestock-human contact and micro-organism transmission. Better understanding of contact patterns driving micro-organism transmission from animals to humans is needed to provide options for prevention and thus deserves more attention.
Title: Human-livestock contacts and their relationship to transmission of zoonotic pathogens, a systematic review of literature-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
[A]:
True