You will be given a definition of a task first, then an example. Follow the example to solve a new instance of the task.
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.

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.
Why? 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.

New input: Paragraph: A large study by doctors from King's College London found that rates of PTSD among British armed forces were stable at around 4 percent, but there were higher rates of common mental disorders such as anxiety and depression, and of alcohol misuse. "Our view is that alcohol misuse is actually a greater problem for the armed forces than PTSD," said Simon Wessely of the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, who led the study. The researchers noted that studies in the United States had found high levels PTSD among veterans returning from active service, and said those findings had led some to predict Britain too would suffer a "tidal wave" of mental health problems. PTSD can stem from wartime trauma such as being wounded or seeing others hurt or killed. An estimated 180,000 troops have served in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001. The British study, published in the Lancet medical journal, used data from almost 10,000 UK troops. It was funded by the Ministry of Defense, but the researchers stressed that ministers had no other involvement in the work. Around 4 percent suffered PTSD, 20 percent had symptoms of common mental disorders which would not normally need medical attention, and 13 percent were misusing alcohol, it found. But troops who had been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan were 22 percent more likely to abuse alcohol than those who had not. "We're not seeing this tidal wave of mental health problems, as was predicted, and (our findings) definitely don't reflect what's being seen in the U.S," Nicola Fear, who also worked on the study, told a London briefing. Wessely, however, warned that while rates of trauma stress were low, the sheer numbers of British troops deployed in recent years meant "more and more people with mental health problems" would be coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan. "Services that care for veterans are going to get busier and are going to get a higher workload," he told the briefing. "The numbers will increase as long as the deployment continues." "We will see more people but that does not mean a catastrophic decline in mental health." A large U.S. study in 2007 found that U.S. male military veterans were twice as likely to commit suicide than people who had never been in the military. Matthew Hotopf, also from King's, said the differences between the U.S. and the UK were "quite striking" and may be due to the fact that U.S. troops often deploy for longer periods up to 15 months, rather than the 6-month deployments usual for British forces. Fear said the team found no increased prevalence of PTSD in soldiers who had been deployed more than once, but they did find a slight rise in rates of stress disorder as the time since troops' return from deployment increased. "The longer you have been back from deployment, the more likely you are to report symptoms of PTSD," she said. But she said this was "a very small increase" with the highest prevalence of PTSD reaching 6 percent in troops that had been back for up to 4 years. Claim: Study finds alcohol abuse a problem in UK forces.
Solution:
British troops in Afghanistan or Iraq are far more likely to become alcohol abusers back home than fellow troops, but levels of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are stable, psychiatrists said on Thursday.