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.
--------
Question: OBJECTIVE To assess the robustness of patient responses to a new national survey of patient experience as a basis for providing financial incentives to doctors.
DESIGN Analysis of the representativeness of the respondents to the GP Patient Survey compared with those who were sampled (5.5 million patients registered with 8273 general practices in England in January 2009) and with the general population. Analysis of non-response bias looked at the relation between practice response rates and scores on the survey. Analysis of the reliability of the survey estimated the proportion of the variance of practice scores attributable to true differences between practices.
RESULTS The overall response rate was 38.2% (2.2 million responses), which is comparable to that in surveys using similar methodology in the UK. Men, young adults, and people living in deprived areas were under-represented among respondents. However, for questions related to pay for performance, there was no systematic association between response rates and questionnaire scores. Two questions which triggered payments to general practitioners were reliable measures of practice performance, with average practice-level reliability coefficients of 93.2% and 95.0%. Less than 3% and 0.5% of practices had fewer than the number of responses required to achieve conventional reliability levels of 90% and 70%. A change to the payment formula in 2009 resulted in an increase in the average impact of random variation in patient scores on payments to general practitioners compared with payments made in 2007 and 2008.
CONCLUSIONS There is little evidence to support the concern of some general practitioners that low response rates and selective non-response bias have led to systematic unfairness in payments attached to questionnaire scores. The study raises issues relating to the validity and reliability of payments based on patient surveys and provides lessons for the UK and for other countries considering the use of patient experience as part of pay for performance schemes.

Answer: True

Question: The antimycotic ciclopirox olamine is an intracellular iron chelator that has anticancer activity in vitro and in vivo. We developed an oral formulation of ciclopirox olamine and conducted the first-in-human phase I study of this drug in patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies (Trial registration ID: NCT00990587). Patients were treated with 5-80 mg/m oral ciclopirox olamine once daily for five days in 21-day treatment cycles. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic companion studies were performed in a subset of patients. Following definition of the half-life of ciclopirox olamine, an additional cohort was enrolled and treated with 80 mg/m ciclopirox olamine four times daily. Adverse events and clinical response were monitored throughout the trial. Twenty-three patients received study treatment. Ciclopirox was rapidly absorbed and cleared with a short half-life. Plasma concentrations of an inactive ciclopirox glucuronide metabolite were greater than those of ciclopirox. Repression of survivin expression was observed in peripheral blood cells isolated from patients treated once daily with ciclopirox olamine at doses greater than 10 mg/m, demonstrating biological activity of the drug. Dose-limiting gastrointestinal toxicities were observed in patients receiving 80 mg/m four times daily, and no dose limiting toxicity was observed at 40 mg/m once daily. Hematologic improvement was observed in two patients. Once-daily dosing of oral ciclopirox olamine was well tolerated in patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies, and further optimization of dosing regimens is warranted in this patient population.

Answer: False

Question: PURPOSE To assess the efficacy, dose stability, safety, and abuse potential of long-term, nightly benzodiazepine treatment of chronic disorders of disrupted nocturnal sleep.
PATIENTS AND METHODS During a 12-year period, one author evaluated and treated 170 adult referrals for > or = 6 months with nightly benzodiazepine therapy for longstanding, sleep-disruptive disorders: injurious sleepwalking and sleep terrors (69); rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (52); chronic, severe insomnia (25); and restless legs syndrome/periodic limb movement disorder (24).
RESULTS Complete/substantial control of the sleep disorders was achieved by 146 patients (86%); 8% had adverse effects requiring medication changes; 2% had relapses of alcohol or chemical abuse requiring hospitalization; another 2% at times misused their medications. A total of 136 patients received clonazepam nightly for a mean 3.5 (+/- 2.4) years, with no significant difference in inital versus final mean dose: 0.77 mg (+/- 0.46) versus 1.10 mg (+/- 0.96). Similar results were obtained with chronic alprazolam treatment and with other benzodiazepine treatments.
CONCLUSION Long-term, nightly benzodiazepine treatment of injurious parasomnias and other disorders of disrupted nocturnal sleep resulted in sustained efficacy in most cases, with low risk of dosage tolerance, adverse effects, or abuse. Data from this study on the treatment of chronic, severe insomnia (a small subset of all insomnia) are not generalizable to the typical insomnia patient.

Answer:
True