TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you are given an abstract of article. Your task is to generate label "True" if abstract is structured, otherwise generate "False". A structured abstract is composed of a topic sentence (or key sentence), relevant supporting sentences, and a closing (or transition) sentence. This structure is key to keeping your abstract focused on the main idea and creating a clear and concise image.
PROBLEM: BACKGROUND Open chromatin regions are correlated with active regulatory elements in development and are dysregulated in diseases. The BAF (SWI/SNF) complex is essential for development, and has been demonstrated to remodel reconstituted chromatin in vitro and to control the accessibility of a few individual regions in vivo. However, it remains unclear where and how BAF controls the open chromatin landscape to regulate developmental processes, such as human epidermal differentiation.
RESULTS Using a novel "on-plate" ATAC-sequencing approach for profiling open chromatin landscapes with a low number of adherent cells, we demonstrate that the BAF complex is essential for maintaining 11.6 % of open chromatin regions in epidermal differentiation. These BAF-dependent open chromatin regions are highly cell-type-specific and are strongly enriched for binding sites for p63, a master epidermal transcription factor. The DNA sequences of p63 binding sites intrinsically favor nucleosome formation and are inaccessible in other cell types without p63 to prevent ectopic activation. In epidermal cells, BAF and p63 mutually recruit each other to maintain 14,853 open chromatin regions. We further demonstrate that BAF and p63 cooperatively position nucleosomes away from p63 binding sites and recruit transcriptional machinery to control tissue differentiation.
CONCLUSIONS BAF displays high specificity in controlling the open chromatin landscape during epidermal differentiation by cooperating with the master transcription factor p63 to maintain lineage-specific open chromatin regions.

SOLUTION: True

PROBLEM: Background: Family doctors play an important role in the health care for terminal ill and patients. The current level of palliative care in Germany is strongly criticised, however, empirical data is scare, particularly with respect to family doctors. Methods: Therefore, the attitudes of family doctors (sample: n= 257) in four representative regions in Lower Saxony were studied by using semi-structured telephone interviews. This was part of a health system researchers' expert report. Results: 71doctors could be interviewed (28%). On the average, they cared for four palliative patients with cancer diseases and eight palliative patients with other diseases than cancer at that time. Many of the doctors were available for their patients around the clock, particularly in the final phase. The main area for improvement was considered to be the psychosocial support rather than pain therapy, which is usually focussed. Furthermore, a considerable openness for the establishment of new palliative care structures was shown. Conclusion: Family doctors are highly motivated for palliative care and open for improvements. In the process, the diversity of opinion among professions and disciplines about the current situation and the further development of palliative care should be respected and considered.

SOLUTION: False

PROBLEM: PURPOSE To compare expectations for cancer survivorship care between patients and their physicians and between primary care providers (PCPs) and oncologists.
METHODS Survivors and their physicians were surveyed to evaluate for expectations regarding physician participation in primary cancer follow-up, screening for other cancers, general preventive health, and management of comorbidities.
RESULTS Of 992 eligible survivors and 607 physicians surveyed, 535 (54%) and 378 (62%) were assessable, respectively. Among physician respondents, 255 (67%) were PCPs and 123 (33%) were oncologists. Comparing patients with their oncologists, expectations were highly discrepant for screening for cancers other than the index one (agreement rate, 29%), with patients anticipating significantly more oncologist involvement. Between patients and their PCPs, expectations were most incongruent for primary cancer follow-up (agreement rate, 35%), with PCPs indicating they should contribute a much greater part to this aspect of care. Expectations between patients and their PCPs were generally more concordant than between patients and their oncologists. PCPs and oncologists showed high discordances in perceptions of their own roles for primary cancer follow-up, cancer screening, and general preventive health (agreement rates of 3%, 44%, and 51%, respectively). In the case of primary cancer follow-up, both PCPs and oncologists indicated they should carry substantial responsibility for this task.
CONCLUSION Patients and physicians have discordant expectations with respect to the roles of PCPs and oncologists in cancer survivorship care. Uncertainties around physician roles and responsibilities can lead to deficiencies in care, supporting the need to make survivorship care planning a standard component in cancer management.

SOLUTION:
True