Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Input: Consider Input: Context: Histologic evidence of the comparative neurotoxicity of lidocaine, mepivacaine, and prilocaine is incomplete. We compared the intrathecal neurotoxicity in rats among these 3 drugs based on morphologic and neurofunctional findings.', 'Rats (n=169) randomly received 0.12 microL/g of 0%, 2%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, or 20% lidocaine, mepivacaine, or prilocaine or 25% glucose dissolved in distilled water via a chronically implanted intrathecal catheter. The effect of the agents on neurofunction was evaluated by movement of the hind limb (behavior test) and by sensory threshold (paw-stimulation test). The L1 spinal cord, the posterior and anterior roots, and the cauda equina were removed en bloc 5 days later and examined by light and electron microscopy.', 'A significant decrease in sensory threshold or irreversible hind-limb limitation was observed only in rats receiving 20% lidocaine. Morphologic abnormalities characterized by axonal degeneration were observed in rats receiving > or =7.5% lidocaine, 20% mepivacaine, and 20% prilocaine, at the posterior white matter and the proximal portion of the posterior root just at the entrance into the spinal cord. The incidence of lesions was significantly higher in rats receiving lidocaine than mepivacaine and prilocaine.
Answer: It is suggested that intrathecal mepivacaine and prilocaine are less neurotoxic than highly concentrated lidocaine in a rat intrathecal model.

Output: Are intrathecal mepivacaine and prilocaine less neurotoxic than lidocaine in a rat intrathecal model?

Input: Consider Input: Context: Eph receptors, comprising the A- and B-subfamilies, are the largest family of receptor tyrosine kinases in the mammalian genome, and their function is critical for morphogenesis in a variety of contexts. Whereas signaling through B-type Ephs has been demonstrated to play a role in cleft lip and palate (CL/P), the involvement of A-type Ephs has not been examined in this context notwithstanding a recent genome-wide association study that identified the EPHA3 locus as a candidate for non-syndromic CL/P.', 'Here, we present a systematic analysis of the gene expression patterns for the nine EphA receptors at progressive stages of mouse development and find that EphA3, EphA4, and EphA7 exhibit restricted overlapping patterns of expression during palate development. We find that homozygous mutation of EphA3 or compound homozygous mutation of EphA3 and EphA4 in mice does not result in defective midfacial development, supporting the possibility of redundant function with EphA7. We also document previously undescribed expression patterns in other tissues of the craniofacial complex including the lacrimal duct and salivary glands.
Answer: Together, these results are consistent with the hypothesis that mutations in EPHA family genes may cause CL/P and also suggest that functional redundancy between family members may be at play.

Output: Does embryonic expression of EphA receptor genes in mice support their candidacy for involvement in cleft lip and palate?

Input: Consider Input: Context: Cross-sectional, clinical measurement.', 'To investigate the validity of the Duruoz Hand Index (DHI) in the assessment of hand function in patients with tetraplegia.', "A total of 40 patients with tetraplegia participated. Patients' upper extremities were assessed on the level of 'body function and structure' [The American Spinal Cord Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) 2000 revised criteria, upper extremity motor score (UEMS), neurologic level of injury and visual analogue scale of hand function (VAS-HF)], 'activity' [DHI and Quadriplegia index of function-short form (QIF-SF)] and 'body function and structure, activity and participation' [Health Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36)] according to International Classification of Function.", 'The DHI showed significant correlations with UEMS, AIS, QIF-SF, VAS-HF, physical functioning and physical compound summary scores of SF-36.
Answer: The DHI was found a valid method in the assessment of hand functions in patients with tetraplegia.
Output: Do validation of Duruoz Hand Index in patients with tetraplegia?