Audit: QRS - Adenosine for Hair Regrowth

Audit conducted on 28/06/2026 01:29 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Summary

Items	Count
Total	91
Passed	86
Failed	0
N/A	5
Pass Rate	100.00%

Total = Passed + Failed + N/A
Pass Rate = Passed / (Passed + Failed) × 100
N/A items are excluded from the pass rate calculation

1. General Rules

#	Description	Result	Comments
1.1	Every claim, magnitude, label, recommendation, and statement in the QRS is literally supported by content in the source ER.	🟢	All QRS content traces to ER passages.
1.2	Where the ER uses cautious phrasing (“not formally studied”, “None documented in human trials to date”, “theoretical concern”, “data are limited”), the QRS uses the same phrasing.	🟢	“Theoretical systemic effects”, “unknown safety in pregnancy and breastfeeding”, “precaution, pending data” mirror ER caution.
1.3	The QRS never strengthens an ER claim (e.g., “not formally studied” → “not required”) or softens one (e.g., “do not use during pregnancy” → “use with caution during pregnancy”).	🟢	Pregnancy framed as precaution pending data, matching ER.
1.4	The QRS does not relabel an ER fact under a different decision category. A “Benefit-Modifying Factor” from ER section is not surfaced as a “Caution”; a “Risk-Modifying Factor” is not surfaced as a “Side Effect”; etc.	🟢	Caution items drawn from ER Key Interactions; contraindications from ER avoid/caution populations.
1.5	PubMed IDs, study citations, expert names, clinical trial identifiers (NCT*), and brand names appear in the QRS only if they appear in the source ER for the same fact.	🟢	No PMIDs, citations, NCT IDs, or new brand names in the QRS.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions introduced.

2. Focus, Tone & Audience

#	Description	Result	Comments
2.1	The QRS follows the tone of the ER, which is determined by the ER’s own language, phrasing, and framing.	🟢	Objective, evidence-weighted tone consistent with ER.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Maintained throughout.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Presents evidence, not directives.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No advice phrasing; disclaimer present.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Information-presenting voice.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person address.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Plain language used; technical terms minimal.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Compact cells and bullets.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	No direct address.
2.10	The target audience is health- and longevity-oriented adults who are risk-aware, proactive, and actively seeking to optimize health or apply the intervention under review.	🟢	Framing fits optimization-oriented audience.
2.11	The target audience is willing to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes as well as follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢	Protocol (twice-daily, 6–12 months) assumes committed reader.
2.12	The document is NOT written for the general population, who are unwilling to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes or follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢	Not generalist framing.
2.13	Framing, takeaways, and risk/benefit weighting throughout the document reflect this audience, including where an intervention’s signal for the average person differs from its signal for this audience.	🟢	Weighting reflects proactive audience.
2.14	The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) are quoted verbatim.	🟢	No “anti-aging” language present.
2.15	The document’s own voice uses formal clinical and scientific terminology, not colloquial or consumer-grade language (e.g., “oral medication” not “pill(s)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	Terminology is formal (e.g., “topical”, “scalp dermatitis”, “contact dermatitis”).

3. Template Integrity

#	Description	Result	Comments
3.1	The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified: Card and section headings: “Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”; Gate headings: “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”; Tier labels: “High”, “Medium”, “Low”, “Speculative”; Table column headers in Monitoring: “Marker”, “Target”, “Why”	🟢	All fixed headings and labels present verbatim.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All template spans present, including hidden benefits_high, risks_high, risks_medium.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	No unaddressed spans modified.

4. Formatting

#	Description	Result	Comments
4.1	When the source ER section is empty, the QRS uses the ER’s own empty-state phrasing verbatim. Typical phrasings are “None documented in human trials to date” and “Not formally studied”	🟢	Empty benefit/risk tiers hidden via display:none rather than empty-state text; no empty ER sections mis-rendered.
4.2	Where the ER presents a bulleted item as “Label: content”, the QRS uses the ER’s bold label verbatim as the cell or row label.	🟢	Protocol/monitoring labels match ER wording.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Labels faithful to ER.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji indicators in rendered content.
4.5	The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page.	🟢	Content condensed to one-page budget.

5. Metadata

#	Description	Result	Comments
5.1	The metadata is placed inside a single HTML comment that is the first element after “<!doctype html>” and before any other comment, head, or body content.	🟢	Comment block at lines 2–14, first after doctype.
5.2	Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML.	🟢	YAML delimited by — at lines 3 and 13.
5.3	The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS and is not surfaced by any other element on the sheet.	🟢	Enclosed in HTML comment; not rendered.
5.4	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Values trimmed; duration quoted appropriately.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	er_filename: adenosine_hair_2026-0628-0002_Opus_ER.md.
5.6	Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]”	🟢	qrs_prompt_version: 26.5.18 matches QRS.md.
5.7	Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430)	🟢	qrs_creation_date: 2026-0628-0002.
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢	qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus.
5.9	The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT)	🟢	“Opus” is single word.
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢	qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 4.8.
5.11	The full name of the AI consists of the [qrs_creator_ai_nickname] and the model version number and no additional qualifier (e.g., Opus 4.6, Sonnet 3.2, Grok 4.5, Gemini 3.1, ChatGPT 5.4)	🟢	“Opus 4.8” — nickname plus version, no qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	qrs_filename: adenosine_hair_2026-0628-0002_Opus_QRS.html.
5.13	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Frontmatter clean and consistent.

#	Description	Result	Comments
6.1	[page_title] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER `frontmatter` followed by “ - Quick Reference Sheet” (e.g., “Intervention - Quick Reference Sheet”). The [canonical_topic] is HTML-entity-encoded as needed (e.g., `&` for `&`)	🟢	“Adenosine for Hair Regrowth - Quick Reference Sheet”; no entities needed.
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER `frontmatter`, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., `&` for `&`)	🟢	“Adenosine for Hair Regrowth”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	06/28/2026 from 2026-0628.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	“Opus 4.8”.
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	Header limited to title and subline only.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER `Conclusion` section	🟢	Distills ER Conclusion (thicker hair, less shedding, gentle, thin evidence, gradual effect).
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	55 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each claim traces to Conclusion (lines 376–378).
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Plain language; no acronyms.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial citations.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No statistics cited.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	Drawn from ER “Populations who should avoid or use caution” (line 249).
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	Allergy, active scalp dermatitis, pregnancy/breastfeeding.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Three <li> items.
8.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	Items are terse, no trailing dash clauses.
8.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible (shortened or trimmed where needed to fit the one-page budget, but never dropped entirely).	🟢	“(precaution, pending data)” preserved.
8.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	🟢	No ranking notation present; nothing to normalize.
8.7	If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Contraindications are present.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	Drawn from ER Key Interactions bullets (lines 239–247).
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Caution-severity interactions only; “Oral supplements” (monitor) and contraindications excluded.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Four <li> items.
9.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	Concise; no trailing dash clauses.
9.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — example drug lists, time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible (shortened or trimmed where needed to fit the one-page budget, but never dropped entirely).	🟢	Example drug parentheticals (minoxidil; caffeine/retinoid/ketoconazole; procyanidins; microneedling/PRP) preserved.
9.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	🟢	No ranking notation; comma-separated lists used.
9.7	If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Key Interactions are present.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Derived from ER Therapeutic Protocol “Standard regimen” (line 269).
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Formulation, Frequency, Duration.
10.3	If less that three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	Three distinct aspects present.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER `Protocol` section.	🟢	All three action cells populated from ER protocol.

11. Time to Effect

#	Description	Result	Comments
11.1	The three sets of [time] items cover the three most important time-to-effect aspects from the ER	🟢	Thicker hair, reduced shedding, full assessment (ER line 316).
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Thicker hair (top Medium benefit) first, then shedding, then full assessment.
11.3	If less that three distinct time-to-effect aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	Three aspects present.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All time cells populated from ER.
11.5	If the ER does not provide any information on time to effect, the section is removed completely from the `Protocol Panel`	N/A	ER provides time-to-effect data.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER `Expected Benefits` section	🟢	Matches ER Expected Benefits tiers.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four variables present.
12.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact.	🟢	Concise benefit phrases only.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	“(Growing-Phase)” and example parentheticals stripped.
12.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	🟢	benefits_high hidden via display:none (ER has no High tier).

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER `Potential Risks & Side Effects` section	🟢	Matches ER Potential Risks tiers.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four variables present.
13.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact.	🟢	Concise risk phrases only.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheticals retained.
13.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	🟢	risks_high and risks_medium hidden via display:none (ER has only Low and Speculative).

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	Derived from ER Monitoring Protocol biomarker table.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	Ferritin, Vitamin D, TSH, Zinc — all four listed with targets and rationale.
14.3	[monitoring_cadence] is populated with the monitoring cadence/frequency derived from the ER `Monitoring` section. It is not left with placeholder text or empty.	🟢	“Reassess at ~3 months, 6 months, then every 6 months” matches ER line 340.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	Drawn from ER qualitative markers list (lines 353–356).
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All four qualitative markers listed.

Issues 28/06/2026 01:29

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 28/06/2026 01:24

12.4 — Parenthetical not stripped: benefits_low retains the parenthetical gloss “(growing-phase)” in “increased anagen (growing-phase) hair rate” (line 528); item 12.4 requires parenthetical content to be stripped, not preserved.

Fixes 28/06/2026 01:24

12.4 — Parenthetical stripped: Removed the “(growing-phase)” gloss from benefits_low; changed “increased anagen (growing-phase) hair rate” to “increased anagen hair rate”.