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: Coaches and many youth athletes automatically would undergo training to detect signs of a concussion and understand the potential consequences of a brain injury under rules proposed by the New Mexico Department of Health. The agency has scheduled a public hearing later this month on the proposal requiring annual training about concussions not only of coaches but also parents and young athletes themselves — once they turn 11. Agency official were unavailable Friday for comment. Those children would sign a form each year that shows they completed brain-injury prevention training session linked to standards from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2010, New Mexico adopted far-reaching prevention and education measures to address concussions and potential brain injuries in school sports, and more recent legislation in 2017 extended training and education to student athletes. State Senator and high school teacher Bill Soules of Las Cruces said he sponsored the 2017 bill after conversations with students who felt left out of decisions about concussions in athletics. He said protocols for non-scholastic youth sports were not fully addressed at the time — and applauded the idea of expanding youth education. “The idea is that students have an awareness as to what the symptoms are of concussions because sometimes they don’t show up until one or two hours afterward, and the coach is long gone,” he said. The newly proposed brain injury rules echo many guidelines already in place at statewide youth sports organizations affiliated with national governing bodies, such as New Mexico Youth Soccer that oversees a long list of clubs and leagues across the state. Gloria Faber, executive director of New Mexico Youth Soccer, said the new state rules may be help independent youth sports groups keep up with evolving research on brain injuries and ensure that athletes take adequate time off after a concussion. She said standards for non-scholastic sports are especially important because many coaches are parent volunteers and competition begins at a young age. New Mexico’s proposed new rules include a standard sit-out period for symptoms of a concussion or brain injury — of at least 10 days. Players would return only with a written medical release. In 2015, a New Mexico judge overruled state concussion protocols to allow a high school football player in Rio Rancho to play in a title game after his parents challenged the school’s diagnosis.
A:
New Mexico seeks concussion safeguards for more youth sports.