Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.
One example is below.
Q: "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."
A: Some appendicitis cases may not require ’emergency’ surgery
Rationale: The paragraph mentions that "Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn’t have to be." which is considered evidence for the output. Thus, the output is a valid claim.
Q: Estimates cost to be $2-3 /day. Provides at least a ball park estimate for people about the amount of weight that might be anticipated to be lost with the use of this medication. The story explains that about 70% of users experience gastrointestinal complications and lists some. While discussion of a particular study is provided, there is no information about the nature of the study (i.e. randomized or not) and no details that would permit the reader to access the reference. Brief mention of medical benefits that can be gained from the amount of weight loss attained with the use of xenical (e.g. lower BP, improved cholesterol levels, reduced risk of diabetes). Provides quotes from drug maker, researchers, and public watchdog organization Article presents information on weight loss results from xenical, diet, and exercise (7% of body weight) compared with diet and exercise (4% of body weight) over a 4 year period. The story did not mention sibutramine, another prescription weight loss drug. Article includes the fact that the switch in status from prescription only to OTC is under FDA consideration. Article is about a medication, xenical, available by prescription that is being considered for sale as an over-the-counter (OTC) drug.
A:
Weighing a Pill For Weight Loss