Audit: QRS - Canagliflozin for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 18/07/2026 18:08 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 91
Passed 81
Failed 0
N/A 10
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 content (at-a-glance, protocol, benefits, risks, gates, monitoring targets, qualitative markers) traces to specific 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. 🟢 Speculative tiers and “human benefit remains unproven” mirror ER’s cautious framing.
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/breastfeeding and other contraindications retained at ER strength; no softening or strengthening.
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. 🟢 Contraindications and interactions come from the ER’s “Key Interactions & Contraindications” section; no cross-category relabeling.
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 contains no PMIDs, NCT IDs, expert names, or brand names.
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-graded tone matches the ER.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Expert yet accessible; data-driven with plain-language explanations.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Presents evidence and options rather than directives.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 Descriptive framing throughout; no prescriptive advice.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 Protocol subs describe clinical/off-label use descriptively (e.g., “favors the lower dose”).
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 🟢 Technical terms are kept minimal and plain in the at-a-glance.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Compact lists and short cells throughout.
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 targets a proactive longevity 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. 🟢 Content assumes willingness to monitor and manage protocols.
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 framed for the general population.
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. 🟢 Notes off-label/unproven longevity signal vs. established disease benefits.
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. 🟢 Uses “longevity” throughout; no “anti-aging”.
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. 🟢 Uses clinical register (“prescription diabetes drug”, “orthostatic”-equivalent phrasing); no consumer-grade slang.

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. 🟢 Full standard span set present (header, at-a-glance, actions, times, benefits, gates, risks, markers 1-9, cadence, qualitative 1-6).
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” N/A No ER section mapped to the QRS is empty.
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 align with the ER’s presentation.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Labels preserved (Dose, Timing, Schedule; marker names; tiers).
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji indicators; ER’s tier emojis and “⚠️ Conflicted” markers stripped.
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 a single-page layout.

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. 🟢 Metadata comment at lines 2-14, first element 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 “—” (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. 🟢 Inside an 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 for its colon.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 er_filename: canagliflozin_2026-0718-1531_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: 26.7.02
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: 2026-0718-1801
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” — 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.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 qrs_filename: canagliflozin_2026-0718-1531_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. 🟢 All values clean and consistently formatted.

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., &amp; for &) 🟢 “Canagliflozin for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”.
6.2 [header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., &amp; for &) 🟢 “Canagliflozin for Health & Longevity”.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 2026-0718-1801 → 07/18/2026.
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 standard subline.

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section 🟢 Condenses the Conclusion’s core points.
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. 🟢 Mechanism, cardio-renal protection, mouse study, caloric-restriction resemblance, and unproven human benefit all trace to the Conclusion.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 Uses “excess sugar”, “flush”, plain-language phrasing; no acronyms.
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trial names, years, or sample sizes.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No effect sizes or statistics.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Drawn from “Populations who should avoid it”.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 All six contraindication populations represented.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each item wrapped in <li>.
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. 🟢 Trailing explanations (e.g., “where the drug is ineffective and riskier”) stripped.
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). 🟢 “(Child-Pugh Class C)” 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. N/A The ER contraindications use no in-paren ranking notation.
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 the interaction subsections.
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 All 11 interaction groups represented; no contraindications duplicated.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each item wrapped in <li>.
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. 🟢 Trailing “— caution/monitor” clauses stripped.
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 lists preserved (sulfonylureas, diuretics, enzyme inducers, NSAIDs, supplements).
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 The ER interactions use no in-paren ranking notation.
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 🟢 Dose, timing, and dosing derived from the Therapeutic Protocol.
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Dose, Timing, Schedule.
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 actionable aspects are 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 sets filled with ER-derived content.

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 🟢 Heart & kidney protection, glucose lowering, weight & blood pressure.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Ordered cardio-renal (High) → glucose (High) → weight/BP (Medium).
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 time-to-effect aspects are present.
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢 All three time sets filled with ER-derived content.
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.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 Tiers and items match the Expected Benefits section.
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four tier variables populated.
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 item names only.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No magnitudes or parentheticals carried through.
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. N/A Every benefit sub-section has items.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 Tiers and items match the Potential Risks & Side Effects section.
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four tier variables populated.
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 item names only.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 “⚠️ Conflicted” markers and magnitudes stripped.
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 Every risk sub-section has items.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Derived from “Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success”.
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All nine biomarkers 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. 🟢 “Baseline before starting; ~2–4 weeks after starting, then every 3–6 months, and during any acute illness”.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Derived from the ER’s qualitative markers list.
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All six qualitative markers listed.

Issues 18/07/2026 18:08

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.