Audit: QRS - BPN14770 for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 04/09/2026 13:08 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	93
Passed	84
Failed	0
N/A	9
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.	🟢	Traced every span to the ER: gates to Key Interactions & Contraindications, protocol cells to Therapeutic Protocol, benefit/risk tiers to the ER H4 headings, markers and cadence to Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success.
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.	🟢	“No clinical practice exists” (action_1_sub), “was reported to persist” (time_3_sub), “No established target exists” (marker_8_target) all carry the ER hedges verbatim.
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”).	🟢	Contraindications remain absolute (“Anyone outside a clinical trial”, “Pregnancy and breastfeeding”); interactions remain monitor/caution-level. No shift in either direction.
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.	🟢	Nothing from Benefit-Modifying Factors, Risk-Modifying Factors or Risk Mitigation Strategies appears in the gates or risk tiers; each QRS block draws from its own ER section only.
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.	🟢	The QRS carries no PMIDs, no NCT numbers, no author names and no brand name; the generic drug names in the interaction gate (rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, rifampicin, donepezil, omeprazole, etc.) are the ER’s own for the same bullets.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No sponsor, foundation, author or institution is named anywhere in the sheet.

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.	🟢	Reproduces the ER’s sceptical, replication-focused register (“failed in larger studies”, “Rapid where it appears at all”).
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Objective and data-driven throughout; the protocol, monitoring targets and qualitative markers give the reader concrete instrumentation rather than a verdict alone.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Content is stated as observed practice and measured ranges, not as instructions issued to a patient.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperatives; monitoring targets are transcribed from the ER’s “Optimal Functional Range” column rather than prescribed.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No “recommended”, “advised” or “should” constructions in the QRS’s own voice.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second person anywhere; marker_8_target uses “the individual’s own baseline” rather than “your baseline”.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms that remain (eGFR, Child-Pugh, CYP3A4, PHQ-9/GAD-7) are load-bearing decision-gate and lab terms taken from the ER; the at-a-glance paragraph is jargon-free.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Gate items are stripped to the key fact; benefit and risk tiers are semicolon-separated phrases; no section carries an explanatory sentence beyond its budget.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed — no “you”/”your” in any span.
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.	🟢	The sheet assumes a reader who will run a computerized cognitive battery, PHQ-9/GAD-7 and a six-marker blood panel around an unapproved compound.
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.	🟢	Cadence span requires baseline plus four-weekly cognitive and mood testing, weekly weighing, and bloodwork at six weeks, three months and six-monthly.
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.	🟢	Density, monitoring burden and the transporter/CYP3A4 interaction detail place it well beyond general-population material.
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.	🟢	The at-a-glance and action_2 cells foreground the cognitively-normal-older-adult data (low dose helped, higher dose worsened), which is the audience-relevant signal rather than the fragile X headline.
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.	🟢	“anti-aging” does not occur; the header uses the ER’s canonical “for Health & Longevity”.
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.	🟢	“Gastrointestinal adverse events”, “hepatic impairment”, “cholinesterase inhibitors”, “by mouth” — all formal register. The plain-language at-a-glance is required by item 7.4.

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 twelve fixed strings are byte-identical to the template (lines 444, 490, 539, 568, 582, 603, 630, 634-636, 766).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	Span inventory compared against the template: every named span is present, with the marker_#_* and qualitative_item_# families expanded to marker_1..8 and qualitative_item_1..6.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	A full diff against [qrs_template] shows changes only inside variable spans and the metadata block; the website="evidence_review", website="audit" and website="full_review" spans, all CSS and all structure are untouched.

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”	N/A	No ER source section is empty. The only tier without items (Benefits → Medium) is governed by item 12.5, which explicitly requires display:none instead of empty-state phrasing.
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.	🟢	“Trial regimen in adults”, “Lower-dose alternative”, “Best time of day” and “Persistence after stopping” are the ER’s bold labels verbatim; all gate items reuse the ER’s bold lead-ins.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	The two remaining Time-to-Effect labels (“Caregiver-rated function”, “Working memory”) name the ER’s own H4 benefit headings that the single “Time to effect” bullet splits between, as required by items 11.1/11.2.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji in the file; the ER’s 🟩/🟥/🟨 tier markers and ⚠️ Conflicted flags were correctly dropped in favour of the CSS tier styling.
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.	🟢	Every section is at its condensed minimum: gate items stripped to the key fact, tier items reduced to bare headings, marker “Why” cells to a single clause. No section carries surplus prose.

---

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.	🟢	Lines 2-14; the comment opens immediately after <!doctype html> on line 1 and closes before <html lang="en">.
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.	🟢	Opening --- on line 3, closing --- on line 13; the “QRS — Metadata” text precedes the opening delimiter.
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.	🟢	It sits entirely inside the HTML comment; no metadata value is echoed by any visible element.
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.	🟢	All nine values are trimmed; only duration: "00:03" is quoted, correctly, because it contains a colon.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: bpn14770_2026-0904-1200_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]”	🟢	Line 5: qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02, matching the QRS.md version badge.
5.7	Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430)	🟢	Line 6: qrs_creation_date: 2026-0904-1301.
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢	Line 7: 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” — single word, no version or qualifier.
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢	Line 8: qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 5.
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 5” = nickname + version, no qualifier appended.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: qrs_filename: bpn14770_2026-0904-1200_Opus_QRS.html, matching the file on disk.
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.	🟢	Re-verified across all nine keys including the tooling-added git_user and git_issue; no stray whitespace or unnecessary quoting.

6. Page Title & Header

#	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 &)	🟢	Line 20: BPN14770 for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet, matching ER canonical_topic with the ampersand encoded.
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., & for &)	🟢	Line 415: BPN14770 for Health & Longevity.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 419: 09/04/2026, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of 2026-0904-1301.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 423: Opus 5, matching the frontmatter.
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	The header block is structurally identical to the template; the ER’s “Also known as: Zatolmilast, BPN-14770” line was correctly not carried over.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢	Compresses all four Conclusion paragraphs and closes on the execution-critical fact — unapproved, laboratory chemical outside trials.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	59 words (counted programmatically).
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Mechanism → Conclusion ¶1; caregiver ratings and failed direct tests → ¶2; low-dose vs higher-dose in healthy older adults → ¶2; unapproved / laboratory chemical → ¶3.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms at all; “PDE4D” becomes “a brain enzyme”, “fragile X syndrome” becomes “an inherited intellectual disability”, “crystallized cognition” becomes “memory and vocabulary tests”.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	Refers only to “larger studies”; no trial name, phase, year or enrolment figure.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numbers of any kind appear in the paragraph.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All seven items come from the “Populations who should avoid BPN14770” list in that ER section (ER lines 288-296).
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	One-to-one with the ER list; all seven populations are represented and none is invented.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Seven <li> elements inside the stop_items span (lines 571-577).
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.	🟢	“since no pharmaceutical-grade product exists”, “— no reproductive toxicology is public” and “the sponsor’s own floor for weight-adjusted dosing” are all stripped; no dash-trailing clause survives.
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).	🟢	“(eGFR below 30 mL/min/1.73 m²)” and “(Child-Pugh Class B or C)” retained; only the ER’s inline glosses were trimmed, the thresholds and staging survive intact.
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.	N/A	The ER’s avoid-list uses no ranking notation inside parentheses.
8.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no population, condition, or scenario for which the intervention should be avoided, deferred, or used only under specialist supervision.	🟢	The section is populated, and the ER does name seven such populations, so the constraint is satisfied.
8.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [stop_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not empty.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All nine items map to the ER’s bulleted interaction list (ER lines 268-286).
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Nine of the ER’s ten interaction bullets are carried; “Strong CYP3A4 inhibitors” is correctly omitted because the contraindication list already covers “Anyone taking a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor that cannot be stopped”.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine <li> elements inside the caution_items span (lines 585-593).
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.	🟢	Every “Caution./Monitor. Consequence… Mitigation…” tail is removed, and the em-dash gloss inside the cholinesterase-inhibitor parenthetical is stripped to “(donepezil, rivastigmine)”.
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).	🟢	All six ER example-drug lists survive; only “from Coleus forskohlii” was trimmed from the forskolin entry.
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.	N/A	No ranking notation appears in the ER’s interaction parentheticals; all are already plain comma-separated lists.
9.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no interaction, additive effect, or exposure that changes how the intervention is used.	🟢	The section is populated and the ER names ten interactions, so the constraint is satisfied.
9.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [caution_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not empty.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER Protocol section	🟢	All three cells come from the ER Therapeutic Protocol section (ER lines 320-330).
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Dose, the lower-dose alternative that is the only range with data in cognitively normal adults, and timing — the three actionable bullets; the remaining ER bullets (genetics, sex, biomarkers) are explicitly “unknown” and not actionable.
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	The ER supplies more than three actionable aspects, so no set is unused.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section.	🟢	All nine spans populated; action_1_sub additionally carries the ER’s “No clinical practice exists” caveat, which is the section’s own framing.

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	🟢	The ER’s “Time to effect” bullet supplies two (12-13 week fragile X endpoints; working-memory signal after the first dose) and “Persistence after stopping” the third.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Ordered High (caregiver-rated daily functioning) → Low (working memory) → post-exposure persistence, matching the ER’s benefit tiering.
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 distinct aspects exist, so no set is unused.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine spans populated; each sub-line is near-verbatim ER text.
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	The ER provides time-to-effect information, so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	Every tier item is an ER H4 heading from Expected Benefits.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 541, 546, 549, 556.
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.	🟢	Bare headings only; none of the ER “Magnitude:” figures (+14.04 mm, P = 0.0051, effect size 0.70) or the “Net reading:” commentary is carried over.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses remain in any benefits span.
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.	🟢	The ER states “No benefit reaches Medium”; the benefits_medium span carries style="display: none" (line 546) with no empty-state text.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All eight items are ER H4 headings from that section.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 605, 608, 613, 619.
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.	🟢	Bare headings only; the ER’s frequency figures (4/80, 5.9%, 5 of 10 volunteers) and class-extrapolation rationale are absent.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	“(Nausea, Vomiting and Diarrhea)” is stripped from the High item; no parentheses remain in any risks span.
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.	N/A	All four risk tiers carry items in the ER, so no span needs hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Rows are transcribed from the biomarker table in Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success (ER lines 409-418).
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All eight ER rows present, in ER order, with “Optimal Functional Range” → Target and “Why Measure It?” → Why carried verbatim (only the “(rhabdomyolysis)” gloss trimmed).
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.	🟢	Lines 756-760 reproduce the ER’s baseline requirement (battery run at least twice) and the four-week / weekly / six-week / three-month / six-monthly schedule.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Taken from the “Qualitative markers worth tracking alongside the numbers” list (ER lines 422-427).
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six ER bullets present as qualitative_item_1 through qualitative_item_6, verbatim and in ER order.

Issues 04/09/2026 13:08

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.