Teacher: Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? If you are still confused, see the following example:
Paragraph: "Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release.". Claim: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Solution: We really don't understand why only a handful of mainstream news organizations reported this story. (At least in what we found.) The most common emergency surgery in the world. Rushing to emergency surgery may not carry any benefit. Waiting a few hours may be safer and less expensive. Why is that not a story? We applaud USA Today for finding time and space and clearly it didn't need to free up much space to do a good job telling the story. The story explains that as many as 300,0 appendectomies are done each year in the US. That figure alone explains why this is an important study to report.
Reason: The output is an analysis of the claim while considering the paragraph as a reference. The output highlights the key features presented in the paragraph and explains the claim accordingly.

Now, solve this instance: Paragraph: "More than a decade after being told they had the disease, nearly four out of 10 cancer survivors said they were still plagued by symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, said lead researcher Sophia Smith from the Duke Cancer Institute in Durham, North Carolina. Those symptoms included being extra jumpy, having disturbing thoughts about the cancer and its treatment, or feeling emotionally numb toward friends and family. One in 10 patients also said they avoided thinking about their cancer and one in 20 said they steered clear of situations or activities that reminded them of the disease, a situation that could potentially become a medical problem. "You worry if the patient is avoiding medical care, you worry they might not be getting follow-ups," Smith told Reuters Health. "We don't have data to support that, but we worry about it." The study, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, is based on a survey of 566 patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, a relatively common kind of cancer. Smith's team had surveyed these patients for PTSD symptoms once before, estimating that about one in 12 had full-blown PTSD. The diagnosis involved a trio of symptoms, including avoidance, arousal and flashbacks. Many more had one or more PTSD symptoms, however. The newest survey also showed they often persist. Overall, half of the patients had no PTSD symptoms 13 years after their diagnosis. The problems had disappeared in 12 percent, but had remained or worsened in 37 percent. "This study found that people seemed to have worse PTSD later on," said Bonnie Green, a trauma expert at Georgetown University who pioneered the study of PTSD in breast cancer survivors, but was not linked to the latest study. "It's just very stressful for people to be told that they have cancer. You can't just assume that they feel bad now, but it will go away." She stressed that it's only a minority of patients who develop full-blown PTSD, but added that depression is common after a cancer diagnosis. The new survey shows that low-income people are extra vulnerable to the psychological impact of living with cancer. "I am particularly concerned about the patients who are poor or have less resources, said Smith, adding that doctors have to be better at recognizing distress in patients. ""Each time they come in you are asking not only if they're having pain, but also if they are having stress."" SOURCE: bit.ly/n1pJMg" Claim: Many cancer survivors struggle with trauma stress: study.
Student:
A cancer diagnosis can leave lasting psychological scars akin to those inflicted by war, with the impact in some cases lasting for years, U.S. researchers found in a study.