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: Sleep disturbances have been thought to augment pain. Sleep deprivation has been proven to produce hyperalgesic effects. It is still unclear whether these changes are truly specific to pain and not related to general changes in somatosensory functions. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of total sleep deprivation on thermal pain thresholds (heat, cold) and pain complaints. Thermal detection thresholds (warmth, cold) were included as covariates to determine the contribution of somatosensory functions to changes in pain processing.', 'Twenty healthy volunteers were randomly assigned either to two nights of total sleep deprivation or to two nights of undisturbed night sleep. Sleep deprivation nights were separated by two days with normal night sleep. Heat and cold pain thresholds as well as warmth and cold detection thresholds were measured by use of a peltier thermode in the evening before and the morning after each deprivation or control night. Pain complaints were examined by use of a questionnaire in parallel.', 'During treatment nights, sleep deprivation produced a significant overnight decrease in heat pain thresholds. Cold pain thresholds tended to decrease also during sleep deprivation, whereas the warmth and cold detection thresholds remained unaffected. Accordingly, no substantial contributions of the changes in thermal detection thresholds to the changes in thermal pain thresholds were determined by regression analyses. Pain complaints were not induced by sleep deprivation.\Question: Does sleep deprivation affect thermal pain thresholds but not somatosensory thresholds in healthy volunteers?
[A]: The present findings suggest that sleep deprivation produces hyperalgesic changes that cannot be explained by nonspecific alterations in somatosensory functions.


[Q]: Context: To investigate the independent relationship of individual- and area-level socio-economic status (SES) with the presence and severity of visual impairment (VI) in an Asian population.', 'Cross-sectional data from 9993 Chinese, Malay and Indian adults aged 40-80 years who participated in the Singapore Epidemiology of eye Diseases (2004-2011) in Singapore. Based on the presenting visual acuity (PVA) in the better-seeing eye, VI was categorized into normal vision (logMAR≤0.30), low vision (logMAR>0.30<1.00), and blindness (logMAR≥1.00). Any VI was defined as low vision/blindness in the PVA of better-seeing eye. Individual-level low-SES was defined as a composite of primary-level education, monthly income<2000 SGD and residing in 1 or 2-room public apartment. An area-level SES was assessed using a socio-economic disadvantage index (SEDI), created using 12 variables from the 2010 Singapore census. A high SEDI score indicates a relatively poor SES. Associations between SES measures and presence and severity of VI were examined using multi-level, mixed-effects logistic and multinomial regression models.', 'The age-adjusted prevalence of any VI was 19.62% (low vision = 19%, blindness = 0.62%). Both individual- and area-level SES were positively associated with any VI and low vision after adjusting for confounders. The odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of any VI was 2.11(1.88-2.37) for low-SES and 1.07(1.02-1.13) per 1 standard deviation increase in SEDI. When stratified by unilateral/bilateral categories, while low SES showed significant associations with all categories, SEDI showed a significant association with bilateral low vision only. The association between low SES and any VI remained significant among all age, gender and ethnic sub-groups. Although a consistent positive association was observed between area-level SEDI and any VI, the associations were significant among participants aged 40-65 years and male.\Question: Do composite Measures of Individual and Area-Level Socio-Economic Status Are Associated with Visual Impairment in Singapore?
[A]: In this community-based sample of Asian adults, both individual- and area-level SES were independently associated with the presence and severity of VI.


[Q]: Context: The aim of this retrospective single-center study was to assess the authors' results in mitral-aortic double valve replacement (DVR), with attention focused on the risk factors of in-hospital mortality (HM). As the initial results showed a strong relationship between HM and aortic prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), this led to an assessment of the impact of PPM on the early results of DVR.", "Data from 196 consecutive patients (mean age 60 +/- 10 years) who had undergone DVR between January 1996 and December 2011 at the authors' institution were analyzed. A statistical comparison was made of groups defined by the presence/absence of in-hospital death, postoperative complications, and aortic PPM. A logistic regression analysis of the factors associated with HM and their postoperative evolution was also conducted.", 'Surgery was mostly performed on an elective basis (89.3%), using mainly bileaflet mechanical valves (93.9%). The rate of associated coronary bypass (CABG) was 11.2%. Aortic PPM (i.e., an effective orifice area index (EOAI) < or = 0.85 cm2/m2) was noted in 28.1% of patients. HM (6.63%) was significantly related to PPM (p < 0.002), greater age (p < 0.003), a smaller EOAI (p = 0.005), associated CABG (p < 0.008), and a longer aortic cross-clamp time (p < 0.03). Patients with aortic PPM had a significantly worse early outcome, with higher overall (p < 0.0007) and cardiac (p < 0.05) complication rates, a longer intensive care unit stay (p < 0.03), and an almost six-fold higher rate of HM (16.4% versus 2.8%; p < 0.002). PPM and age as risk factors were included in a predictive model of HM based on logistic regression; a similar model for postoperative complications highlighted PPM, age and cardiopulmonary bypass time as significant risk factors.\Question: Does aortic prosthesis-patient mismatch strongly affect early results of double valve replacement?
[A]:
Aortic PPM greatly affects the postoperative outcome of DVR, as it is related to an increased complication rate and a higher in-hospital mortality. A strategy of avoiding PPM but without taking additional risks might improve the early results of DVR.


