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: The aim of this article is to develop the Spanish adaptation of the internal functioning of Work Teams Scale (QFI-22).', 'The scale was adapted from the French version, and was applied to a sample of 1,055 employees working for firms operating in Spain. The article analyses the internal structure (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis) and internal consistency, and provides convergent validity evidence of the scale.', 'The QFI-22 scale shows the same internal structure as the original. Factor analysis confirmed the existence of two factors: interpersonal support and team work management, with good internal consistency coefficients (1 = .93, 2 = .92). Regarding validity evidence, the QFI-22 scale has significant correlations with other correlates and alternative scales used for comparison purposes. The two factors correlated positively with team vision, participation safety, task orientation and support for innovation (Team Climate Inventory, TCI scale), with progressive culture (Organisational Culture, X-Y scale), and with creating change, customer focus and organisational learning (Denison Organizational Culture Survey, DOCS scale). In contrast, the two factors correlated negatively with traditional culture (X-Y scale).
Answer: The QFI-22 scale is a useful instrument for assessing the internal functioning of work teams.

Output: Does spanish adaptation of the internal functioning of the Work team Scale ( QFI-22 )?

Input: Consider Input: Context: Noninvasive pacemaker stress echocardiography is a newly introduced method for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease in patients with a permanent pacemaker. The prognostic value of pacemaker stress echocardiography has not been studied.', 'We studied 136 patients (mean age 64+/-12 years) with a permanent pacemaker who underwent pacemaker stress echocardiography for evaluation of coronary artery disease. All patients underwent pacemaker stress echocardiography by external programming (pacing heart rate up to ischemia or target heart rate).', 'Thirty-one patients (23%) had normal study results. Ischemia was detected in 75 patients (55%). During a mean follow-up of 3.5+/-2.4 years, 35 deaths (26%) (20 the result of cardiac causes) and 2 nonfatal myocardial infarctions (1%) occurred. The annual cardiac death rate was 1.3% in patients without ischemia and 4.6% in patients with ischemia (P=.01). The annual all-cause mortality rate was 3.1% in patients without ischemia and 7% in patients with ischemia (P=.004). The presence of ischemia during pacemaker stress echocardiography was the strongest independent predictor of cardiac death (hazard ratio 4.1, confidence interval 1.2-14.5) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 2.7, confidence interval 1.2-6.0) in a multivariable model.
Answer: Myocardial ischemia during pacemaker stress echocardiography is an independent predictor of cardiac death and all-cause mortality in patients with a permanent pacemaker.

Output: Does pacemaker stress echocardiography predict cardiac events in patients with permanent pacemaker?

Input: Consider Input: Context: To compare the performance of the bias-adjusted meta-analysis to the conventional meta-analysis assessing seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness among community-dwelling elderly aged 60 years and older.', 'Systematic literature search revealed 14 cohort studies that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Laboratory-confirmed influenza, influenza-like illness, hospitalization from influenza and/or pneumonia, and all-cause mortality were study outcomes. Potential biases were identified using bias checklists. The magnitude and uncertainty of biases were assessed by expert opinion. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using random effects model.', 'After incorporating biases, overall effect estimates regressed slightly toward no effect, with the largest relative difference between conventional and bias-adjusted ORs for laboratory-confirmed influenza (OR, 0.18; 95% CI: 0.01, 3.00 vs. OR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.03, 2.04). In most of the studies, CIs widened reflecting uncertainties about the biases. The between-study heterogeneity reduced considerably with the largest reduction for all-cause mortality (I(2) = 4%, P = 0.39 vs. I(2) = 91%, P < 0.01).
Answer: This case study showed that after addressing potential biases influenza vaccine was still estimated effective in preventing hospitalization from influenza and/or pneumonia and all-cause mortality. Increasing the number of assessors and incorporating empirical evidence might improve the new bias-adjustment method.
Output: Does after adjusting for bias in meta-analysis seasonal influenza vaccine remain effective in community-dwelling elderly?