In this task, you are given an abstract of article. Your task is to generate title for this article. Preferred titles are under thirty words.

Ex Input:
Publisher Summary This chapter discusses the developmental roles of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in skeletal morphogenesis, speculates on the future directions of research in this area, and describes some of the challenges in the field. VEGF regulates osteoclastic differentiation, migration, and activity. VEGF is, therefore, a key coordinator of the entire process. VEGF is necessary for osteoclastic activity both at the stage when the primary ossification center is established and later during bone growth. A number of studies have led to the identification of VEGF as a critical factor for the survival of chondrocytes. Several factors with important roles in regulating bone formation also induce the expression of VEGF by osteoblasts. Prostaglandins E1 and E2, BMP-4, BMP-6, BMP-7, FGF-2, TGF-, endothelin-1, IGF-1, and vitamin D3 can all induce VEGF expression in osteoblasts by activating a variety of signaling pathways. Bone fractures can heal in two divergent ways, similar to the two ways of forming bone during embryonic development. Stabilized fractures heal by intramembranous ossification, and unstable fractures undergo endochondral ossification. The similarity between the embryonic bone development and repair of fractured bones, coupled with the finding that VEGF is expressed at sites of bone fracture, suggests that VEGF is involved in bone repair as it is in bone development.

Ex Output:
Multiple roles of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in skeletal development, growth, and repair.

Ex Input:
BACKGROUND Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has a high prevalence rate in Germany and a further increase is expected within the next years. Although risk factors on an individual level are widely understood, only little is known about the spatial heterogeneity and population-based risk factors of COPD. Background knowledge about broader, population-based processes could help to plan the future provision of healthcare and prevention strategies more aligned to the expected demand. The aim of this study is to analyze how the prevalence of COPD varies across northeastern Germany on the smallest spatial-scale possible and to identify the location-specific population-based risk factors using health insurance claims of the AOK Nordost.
METHODS To visualize the spatial distribution of COPD prevalence at the level of municipalities and urban districts, we used the conditional autoregressive Besag-York-Mollie (BYM) model. Geographically weighted regression modelling (GWR) was applied to analyze the location-specific ecological risk factors for COPD.
RESULTS The sex- and age-adjusted prevalence of COPD was 6.5% in 2012 and varied widely across northeastern Germany. Population-based risk factors consist of the proportions of insurants aged 65 and older, insurants with migration background, household size and area deprivation. The results of the GWR model revealed that the population at risk for COPD varies considerably across northeastern Germany.
CONCLUSION Area deprivation has a direct and an indirect influence on the prevalence of COPD. Persons ageing in socially disadvantaged areas have a higher chance of developing COPD, even when they are not necessarily directly affected by deprivation on an individual level. This underlines the importance of considering the impact of area deprivation on health for planning of healthcare. Additionally, our results reveal that in some parts of the study area, insurants with migration background and persons living in multi-persons households are at elevated risk of COPD.

Ex Output:
Who is where at risk for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease? A spatial epidemiological analysis of health insurance claims for COPD in Northeastern Germany

Ex Input:
OBJECTIVES To describe and explain the primary care experiences of people with multiple long-term conditions in England.
DESIGN AND METHODS Using questionnaire data from 906,578 responders to the English 2012 General Practice Patient Survey, we describe the primary care experiences of patients with long-term conditions, including 583,143 patients who reported one or more long-term conditions. We employed mixed effect logistic regressions to analyse data on six items covering three care domains (access, continuity and communication) and a single item on overall primary care experience. We controlled for sociodemographic characteristics, and for general practice using a random effect, and further, controlled for, and explored the importance of, health-related quality of life measured using the EuroQoL (EQ-5D) scale.
RESULTS Most patients with long-term conditions report a positive experience of care at their general practice (after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and general practice, range 74.0-93.1% reporting positive experience of care across seven questions) with only modest variation by type of condition. For all three domains of patient experience, an increasing number of comorbid conditions is associated with a reducing percentage of patients reporting a positive experience of care. For example, compared with respondents with no long-term condition, the OR for reporting a positive experience is 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.87) for respondents with four or more long-term conditions. However, this relationship is no longer observed after adjusting for health-related quality of life (OR (95% CI) single condition=1.23 (1.21 to 1.26); four or more conditions=1.31 (1.25 to 1.37)), with pain making the greatest difference among five quality of life variables included in the analysis.
CONCLUSIONS Patients with multiple long-term conditions more frequently report worse experiences in primary care. However, patient-centred measures of health-related quality of life, especially pain, are more important than the number of conditions in explaining why patients with multiple long-term conditions report worse experiences of care.

Ex Output:
Why do patients with multimorbidity in England report worse experiences in primary care? Evidence from the General Practice Patient Survey