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.

[EX Q]: The results of this study support previous findings that points towards genus Enterococcus and species E. coli to be involved in the pathogenesis of NNPD. Moreover, the results indicate that NNPD is associated with a disturbed bacterial composition and larger variation between the diarrhoeic piglets.
[EX A]: 1 - finding, 2 - finding

[EX Q]: Background: Infection by multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens leads to poor patient outcomes in intensive care units (ICUs). Contact precautions are necessary to reduce the transmission of MDR pathogens. However, the importance of the surrounding environment is not well known. We studied the effects of ICU relocation on MDR respiratory pathogen detection rates and patient outcomes. Methods: Patients admitted to the ICU before and after the relocation were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline patient characteristics, types of respiratory pathogens detected, antibiotics used, and patient outcomes were measured. Results: A total of 463 adult patients admitted to the ICU, 4 months before and after the relocation, were included. Of them, 234 were admitted to the ICU before the relocation and 229 afterward. Baseline characteristics, including age, sex, and underlying comorbidities, did not differ between the two groups. After the relocation, the incidence rate of MDR respiratory pathogen detection decreased from 90.0 to 68.8 cases per 1,000 patient-days, but that difference was statistically insignificant. The use of colistin was significantly reduced from 53.5 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.3 to 86.7 days) to 18.7 days (95% CI, 5.6 to 31.7 days). Furthermore, the duration of hospital stay was significantly reduced from a median of 29 days (interquartile range [IQR], 14 to 50 days) to 21 days (IQR, 11 to 39 days). Conclusions: Incidence rates of MDR respiratory pathogen detection were not significantly different before and after ICU relocation. However, ICU relocation could be helpful in reducing the use of antibiotics against MDR pathogens and improving patient outcomes.
[EX A]: 1 - background, 2 - background, 3 - background, 4 - background, 5 - method, 6 - method, 7 - method, 8 - finding, 9 - finding, 10 - finding, 11 - finding, 12 - finding, 13 - finding, 14 - finding, 15 - finding, 16 - finding, 17 - finding, 18 - finding, 19 - finding, 20 - finding, 21 - finding

[EX Q]: co (J.A. Hincapié-García). Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx 1551-7411/
[EX A]:
1 - other, 2 - other

