instruction:
In this task, you are given a paragraph (from a research paper) and your task is to classify each sentence of the paragraph (assume n sentence) into the following categories: Background, Purpose, Method, Finding/Contribution, or Other. Return the output in this format: 1 - category of sentence 1, 2 - category of sentence 2, ..., n - category of sentence n; where each number indicates the order of the sentence. The categories can be identified using the following questions:
Background: - Why is this problem important? - What relevant works have been done before? - What did the previous works miss? - What are the high-level research questions? - How might this help other researchers?
Purpose: - What specific things do the researchers want to do? - What specific knowledge do the researchers want to know? - What specific hypothesis do the researchers want to test?
Method: - How did the researchers do it or find it out? - What are the procedures and steps of this research?
Finding/Contribution: - What did the researchers find out? Did the proposed methods work? - Did things behave as the researchers expected?
Other: put every text fragment that does not fit into any of the categories above here. Put a sentence here if its not in English, is not part of the article, contains numbers and dates, is a caption of a figure or a table, is a formatting error, or you are not sure about it.
question:
Profiles of antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-associated coronavirus in 445 probable SARS patients and 3,749 healthy people or non-SARS patients were analyzed by antigen-capturing enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Antinucleocapsid antibodies were elucidated in 17.5% of the probable SARS patients 1 to 7 days after the onset of symptoms and in 80% of the patients 8 to 14 days after the onset. About 90% of the probable SARS patients were positive 15 or more days after illness. Antibody titers increased up to 70 days, and high antibody titers were maintained at least for another 3 months. Of the healthy people and non-SARS patients, only seven (0.187%) were weakly positive. FIG. 1. Development of anti-N protein antibody titers over time in 445 patients who probably had SARS. 228 NOTES CLIN. DIAGN. LAB. IMMUNOL.
answer:
1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - finding, 4 - finding, 5 - finding, 6 - finding, 7 - finding, 8 - other, 9 - finding, 10 - other, 11 - other, 12 - other, 13 - other

question:
This study aimed to determine the aetiology of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) by adding polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to conventional methods and to describe the clinical and laboratory features between patients with bacterial pneumonia (BP) and viral pneumonia (VP). Adults with CAP admitted from November 2009 to October 2010 were included. Demographics, comorbidities, severity and clinical features were recorded. Conventional microbiological methods included blood and sputum cultures, acute and convalescent serologic samples, and antigen urinary detection. New methods included multiplex PCR for Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, Bordetella pertussis and 15 respiratory viruses. A total of 169 patients were included. Using conventional methods, we identified a pathogen in 51 % of cases. With PCR, up to 70 % of cases had an aetiological diagnosis. Fortyfive patients had BP (34 %), 22 had VP (17 %) and 25 (19 %) had co-infection (BP and VP). Pneumococci and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were the most frequently identified pathogens. Procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) median values were significantly higher in BP than in VP patients. Shaking chills, higher CURB score and shock were significantly more frequent in BP. A viral infection was identified in more than one-third of patients with CAP. Clinical and laboratory features could help to differentiate between VP and BP and to guide empirical therapy. A. Sangil : E. Calbo : S. Benet : M. E. Viladot : V. Pascual :
answer:
1 - purpose, 2 - method, 3 - method, 4 - method, 5 - method, 6 - method, 7 - method, 8 - method, 9 - finding, 10 - finding, 11 - finding, 12 - finding, 13 - finding, 14 - finding, 15 - finding, 16 - finding, 17 - finding, 18 - finding, 19 - finding

question:
The hydroalcoholic extract of Punica granatum (pomegranate) leaves was previously demonstrated to be anti-inflammatory in a rat model of lipopolysaccharide-(LPS-) induced acute peritonitis. Here, we investigated the anti-inflammatory effects of the ethyl acetate fraction obtained from the pomegranate leaf hydroalcoholic extract (EAFPg) on the LPS-induced acute lung injury (ALI) mouse model. Male Swiss mice received either EAFPg at different doses or dexamethasone (per os) prior to LPS intranasal instillation. Vehicle-treated mice were used as controls. Animals were culled at 4 h after LPS challenge, and the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung samples were collected for analysis. EAFPg and kaempferol effects on NO and cytokine production by LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages were also investigated. Pretreatment with EAFPg (100-300 mg/kg) markedly reduced cell accumulation (specially neutrophils) and collagen deposition in the lungs of ALI mice. The same animals presented with reduced lung and BALF TNF- and IL-1 expression in comparison with vehicle controls (p < 0 05). Additionally, incubation with either EAFPg or kaempferol (100 g/ml) reduced NO production and cytokine gene expression in cultured LPS-treated RAW 264.7 macrophages. Overall, these results demonstrate that the prophylactic treatment with EAFPg attenuates acute lung inflammation. We suggest this fraction may be useful in treating ALI.
answer:
1 - background, 2 - purpose, 3 - method, 4 - method, 5 - method, 6 - method, 7 - method, 8 - finding, 9 - finding, 10 - finding, 11 - finding, 12 - finding