In this task, you are given a paragraph (from a research paper) and your task is to classify each sentence of the paragraph (assume n sentence) into the following categories: Background, Purpose, Method, Finding/Contribution, or Other. Return the output in this format: 1 - category of sentence 1, 2 - category of sentence 2, ..., n - category of sentence n; where each number indicates the order of the sentence. The categories can be identified using the following questions: 
 Background: - Why is this problem important? - What relevant works have been done before? - What did the previous works miss? - What are the high-level research questions? - How might this help other researchers?
 Purpose: - What specific things do the researchers want to do? - What specific knowledge do the researchers want to know? - What specific hypothesis do the researchers want to test?
 Method: - How did the researchers do it or find it out? - What are the procedures and steps of this research?
 Finding/Contribution: - What did the researchers find out? Did the proposed methods work? - Did things behave as the researchers expected?
Other: put every text fragment that does not fit into any of the categories above here. Put a sentence here if its not in English, is not part of the article, contains numbers and dates, is a caption of a figure or a table, is a formatting error, or you are not sure about it.

Input: Consider Input: Porcine aminopeptidase N (pAPN) is a cellular membrane protein and a functional receptor for porcine coronaviruses. Here, we describe the heterologous expression of pAPN without signal peptide in BL21(DE3)pLysS host cells. The Escherichia coli (E. coli) harboring the recombinant construct was efficiently induced to express the pAPN protein at a high level. The most optimal expression profile for pAPN expression was investigated. By inoculating a rabbit with the purified pAPN, a high tittered specific antibody was achieved. Biologically, the antibody reacted with either pAPN-expressing E. coli or native pAPN on the surface of swine testis cells. The pAPN and its specific antibody blocked transmissible gastroenteritis coronavirus infection in vitro. Furthermore, the localization of pAPN on the small intestine of swine was analyzed by immunohistochemistry.

Output: 1 - background, 2 - purpose, 3 - method, 4 - finding, 5 - finding, 6 - finding, 7 - finding, 8 - finding, 9 - finding


Input: Consider Input: Fresh demyelinating lesions could be demonstrated in paralyzed animals. Viral antigen was demonstrated and infectious JHM virus could be recovered from one animal which developed clinical signs at 3 months a.i. In one animal with clinical onset of 8 months a.i., completely remyelinated areas as well as recent demyelinating lesions were observed, suggesting a recurrence of the disease process. Remyelinated areas were also found in 40 ~ of clinically silent animals. The morphology of the late onset of the demyelination was similar to that occurring in SDE. Remyelination consisted of both CNS and PNS-type. This animal model offers the possibility to investigate the virus-host relationship which is responsible for the induction of a demyelinating process after a long incubation period.

Output: 1 - finding, 2 - finding, 3 - finding, 4 - finding, 5 - finding, 6 - finding, 7 - finding, 8 - finding, 9 - finding


Input: Consider Input: Objective: In cases of community acquired pneumonia (CAP), it has been known that blood cultures have low yields and rarely affect clinical outcomes. Despite many studies predicting the likelihood of bacteremia in CAP patients, those results have been rarely implemented in clinical practice, and use of blood culture in CAP is still increasing. This study evaluated impact of implementing a previously derived and validated bacteremia prediction rule. Methods: In this registry-based before and after study, we used piecewise regression analysis to compare the blood culture rate before and after implementation of the prediction rule. We also compared 30-day mortality, emergency department (ED) length of stay, time-interval to initial antibiotics after ED arrival, and any changes to the antibiotics regimen as results of the blood cultures. In subgroup analysis, we compared two groups (with or without the use of the prediction rule) after implementation period, using propensity score matching. Results: Following the implementation, the blood culture rate declined from 85.5% to 78.1% (P = 0.003) without significant changes in 30-day mortality and antibiotics regimen. The interval to initial antibiotics (231 min vs. 221 min, P = 0.362) and length of stay (1019 min vs. 954 min, P = 0.354) were not significantly changed. In subgroup analysis, the group that use the prediction rule showed 25 min faster antibiotics initiation (P = 0.002) and 48 min shorter length of stay (P = 0.007) than the group that did not use the rule. Conclusion: Implementation of the bacteremia prediction rule in CAP patients reduced the blood culture rate without affecting the 30-day mortality and antibiotics regimen.


Output: 1 - purpose, 2 - purpose, 3 - purpose, 4 - purpose, 5 - purpose, 6 - purpose, 7 - method, 8 - method, 9 - method, 10 - method, 11 - method, 12 - method, 13 - method, 14 - finding, 15 - finding, 16 - finding, 17 - finding, 18 - finding


