In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Q: Context: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex has been shown to modulate pain and trigeminal nociceptive processing.', 'Ten patients with classical trigeminal neuralgia (TN) were stimulated daily for 20minutes over two weeks using anodal (1mA) or sham tDCS over the primary motor cortex (M1) in a randomized double-blind cross-over design. Primary outcome variable was pain intensity on a verbal rating scale (VRS 0-10). VRS and attack frequency were assessed for one month before, during and after tDCS. The impact on trigeminal pain processing was assessed with pain-related evoked potentials (PREP) and the nociceptive blink reflex (nBR) following electrical stimulation on both sides of the forehead before and after tDCS.', 'Anodal tDCS reduced pain intensity significantly after two weeks of treatment. The attack frequency reduction was not significant. PREP showed an increased N2 latency and decreased peak-to-peak amplitude after anodal tDCS. No severe adverse events were reported.\Question: Does patient-conducted anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex alleviate pain in trigeminal neuralgia?

A: Anodal tDCS over two weeks ameliorates intensity of pain in TN. It may become a valuable treatment option for patients unresponsive to conventional treatment.
****
Q: Context: To assess plantarflexion moment and hip joint moment after-effects following walking on a split-belt treadmill in healthy individuals and individuals post-stroke.', 'Cross-sectional study.', 'Ten healthy individuals (mean age 57.6 years (standard deviation; SD 17.2)) and twenty individuals post-stroke (mean age 49.3 years (SD 13.2)).', 'Participants walked on an instrumented split-belt treadmill under 3 gait periods: i) baseline (tied-belt); ii) adaptation (split-belt); and iii) post-adaptation (tied-belt). Participants post-stroke performed the protocol with the paretic and nonparetic leg on the faster belt when belts were split. Kinematic data were recorded with the Optotrak system and ground reaction forces were collected via the instrumented split-belt treadmill.', 'In both groups, the fast plantarflexion moment was reduced and the slow plantarflexion moment was increased from mid-stance to toe-off in the post-adaptation period. Significant relationships were found between the plantarflexion moment and contralateral step length.\Question: Is plantarflexion moment a contributor to step length after-effect following walking on a split-belt treadmill in individuals with stroke and healthy individuals?

A: Split-belt treadmills could be useful for restoring step length symmetry in individuals post-stroke who present with a longer paretic step length because the use of this type of intervention increases paretic plantarflexion moments. This intervention might be less recommended for individuals post-stroke with a shorter paretic step length because it reduces the paretic plantarflexion moment.
****
Q: Context: To evaluate pazopanib eye drops in subjects with active subfoveal choroidal neovascularization (CNV) secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD).', 'Multicountry, randomized, parallel-group, double-masked, active and placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study of eye drops.', 'A total of 510 subjects (93% white; 58% female; mean age, 75.3 years) whose AMD was previously managed by anti-vascular endothelial growth factor intravitreal injections.', 'Treatments administered for 52 weeks included placebo eye drops instilled 4 times daily (n=73); pazopanib 5 mg/ml instilled 3 (n=72) or 4 times daily (n=74); pazopanib 10 mg/ml instilled 2 (n=73), 3 (n=73), or 4 times daily (n=72); or ranibizumab injection administered once every 4 weeks (n=73). In addition, for all eye drop treatment groups, open-label ranibizumab was administered as needed.', 'The main outcome measures were best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and injection frequency assessed at week 52. Safety was assessed every 4 weeks and pazopanib plasma concentrations were determined at weeks 4 and 24.', 'At week 52, pazopanib, with allowance for as-needed ranibizumab injections, was noninferior to monthly ranibizumab as well as to as-needed ranibizumab administered with placebo eye drops in maintaining BCVA (estimated BCVA gains of 0.3-1.8 vs. 1.4 vs. 0.2 letters, respectively). Pazopanib treatment did not reduce as-needed ranibizumab injections by 50% (prespecified efficacy criterion). At week 52, there were no clinically meaningful changes from baseline in retinal thickness or morphology, CNV size, or lesion characteristics on optical coherence tomography or fluorescein angiography. Complement factor H genotype had no effect on the responses to pazopanib and/or ranibizumab (BCVA, injection rate, or optical coherence tomography/fluorescein angiography changes). Steady-state concentrations of pazopanib in plasma seemed to be reached by week 4. The most common ocular adverse events related to pazopanib and ranibizumab were application site pain (3%) and injection site hemorrhage (1%), respectively. No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported.\Question: Does clinical evaluation of pazopanib eye drop versus ranibizumab intravitreal injections in subjects with neovascular age-related macular degeneration?

A:
Pazopanib was well tolerated. Daily pazopanib eye drops in neovascular AMD subjects did not result in therapeutic benefit beyond that obtained with ranibizumab alone.
****