Audit: QRS - Dihydromyricetin for Skin Rejuvenation

Audit conducted on 12/09/2026 04:13 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	93
Passed	85
Failed	0
N/A	8
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.	🟢	Spot-checked every populated span against the ER: protocol cells vs ER lines 328/332/333, time cells vs lines 165-179 and 365, benefits vs lines 151-215, risks vs lines 243-275, gates vs lines 290-310, markers vs lines 386-396, qualitative vs lines 400-404.
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.	🟢	Cautious phrasing carried verbatim: “No oral protocol has ever been tested against a skin outcome” (line 471) and “Nothing is known beyond eight weeks” (line 531).
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”).	🟢
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.	🟢
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, NCT identifiers, author names or brand names anywhere in the QRS; ER attributions (e.g., “the pivotal study”) were stripped from marker_1_why.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢

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.	🟢
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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)”; “oral” / “administered orally” not “taken by mouth” / “given by mouth”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). This holds on EVERY surface, including the QRS lede — the stricter plain-language bar (see 2.7) does not license lay phrasing for route of administration. Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	Consumer-register terms that do appear (“blood thinners”, “blood-sugar-lowering medicines”) are the ER’s own bold labels, carried verbatim per 4.2.

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”	🟢
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All 34 template variables present; marker_#* and qualitative_item# repeated to 9 and 5 instances respectively, as the template intends.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	Structural diff against [qrs_template] shows the style block byte-identical and the body skeleton identical apart from the repeated monitoring rows and qualitative list items.

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 a QRS variable is empty; the Medium-benefit and High/Medium-risk tiers carry explicit ER statements and are handled under 12.5 / 13.5.
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.	🟢	ER bold labels carried verbatim: “Standard topical regimen”, “Competing approach, oral supplementation”, “Best time of day”; interaction labels kept with drug lists trimmed per 9.5.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢
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 already reduced to its shortest form; the item counts that drive length (12 interactions, 9 markers, 5 qualitative markers) are mandated by 9.2, 14.2 and 15.2 and cannot be dropped.

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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢	Only duration: "00:03" is quoted, which YAML requires because the value contains a colon.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢
5.6	Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of 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)	🟢
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢
5.9	The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT)	🟢
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢
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)	🟢
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢
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.	🟢

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 &)	🟢
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., & for &)	🟢
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	qrs_creation_date 2026-0912-0329 renders as 09/12/2026 (line 421).
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	59 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></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.	🟢
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).	🟢
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 Key Interactions & Contraindications section 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.	🟢
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; six contraindication items are present (lines 570-581).

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></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.	🟢
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).	🟢
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 Key Interactions & Contraindications section uses no ranking notation inside parentheses.
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.	🟢
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; twelve interaction items are present (lines 589-611).

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER Protocol section	🟢
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢
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 Therapeutic Protocol section contains thirteen bullets; all three action sets are used.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section.	🟢

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	🟢
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Ordered by ER magnitude: radiance 19.6% > wrinkle visibility 13.9% > dermal echogenicity 10.4% (ER lines 167, 173, 179).
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	The ER provides more than three time-to-effect aspects; all three time sets are used.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the 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	The ER provides time-to-effect data (Practical Considerations, line 365, plus per-benefit magnitudes), so the row is retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢
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.	🟢
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢
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_medium is empty with style=”display: none” (line 545); the ER’s “No benefit reaches Medium” prose is correctly not carried over.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢
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.	🟢
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢
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 are empty with style=”display: none” (lines 623-624).

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All nine ER biomarkers are present with matching targets.
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.	🟢

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All five ER qualitative markers are present.

Issues 12/09/2026 04:13

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 12/09/2026 04:06

1. 11.4 — Radiance time-to-effect inverted: [time_1_value] at line 500 gives “8 weeks” for radiance and perceived skin age, which contradicts the ER’s time-to-effect bullet (ER line 365) stating “texture and radiance moving fastest” — as written the QRS presents radiance as slower than dermal density (“4 weeks”) and wrinkle (“4–8 weeks”).

Fixes 12/09/2026 04:06

1. 11.4 — Radiance time-to-effect corrected: Changed [time_1_value] from “8 weeks” to “4–8 weeks” and rewrote [time_1_sub] to state that radiance was among the fastest-moving parameters, matching the ER’s “texture and radiance moving fastest” while keeping the 8-week graded skin-age result.

Issues 12/09/2026 03:54

1. 1.3 — Qualitative marker claim strengthened: qualitative_item_5 (QRS line 809) says other people’s comments “track visible change best”, a superlative across all markers, where the ER (line 404) says only “better than self-assessment”.
2. 4.5 — Sheet overruns one A4 page: Rendered source height is roughly 1.8 A4 pages, and part of the excess is avoidable duplication: time_1_sub (QRS 505–506) states the radiance finding twice, and action_3_sub (QRS 485–486) repeats the sunscreen fact already carried by action_1_sub (QRS 457–458).

Fixes 12/09/2026 03:54

1. 1.3 — Qualitative marker claim restored: qualitative_item_5 changed from “which track visible change best” to “which track visible change better than self-assessment”, matching the ER wording at line 404.
2. 4.5 — Duplicated radiance statement removed: time_1_sub changed from “Texture and radiance moved fastest; radiance moved more than any other visually graded parameter, with expert-rated skin age falling alongside.” to “Radiance moved more than any other visually graded parameter, with expert-rated skin age falling alongside.”
3. 4.5 — Duplicated sunscreen fact removed: action_3_sub changed from “Morning topical dose sits under sunscreen. Oral doses with a fat-containing meal for absorption.” to “Oral doses with a fat-containing meal for absorption.”, since action_1_sub already carries the sunscreen instruction.
4. 4.5 — Monitoring cell condensed: marker_3_why shortened from “Objective density measure in the deeper skin layer, the most consistent mover” to “Objective density measure in the deeper skin layer”.

Issues 12/09/2026 03:51

1. 1.1 — Radiance time-to-effect inverted: The Time to Effect panel gives radiance and perceived skin age “8 weeks” (line 501) while dermal density gets “4 weeks” (line 528), implying radiance is the slowest parameter; the ER states “texture and radiance moving fastest” (ER line 365).
2. 2.5 — Imperative phrasing in protocol sub: [action_1_sub] (line 457) opens “Clean dry skin of the whole face and neck, then …”, which reads as an instruction to the reader; the ER phrases it as a prepositional object (“applied … to clean dry skin of the whole face and neck”).

Fixes 12/09/2026 03:51

1. 1.1 — Radiance time-to-effect inverted: Rewrote [time_1_sub] to lead with the ER’s own statement that “texture and radiance moved fastest”, so the 8-week figure reads as the measurement point rather than implying radiance is the slowest parameter.
2. 2.5 — Imperative phrasing in protocol sub: Changed [action_1_sub] from “Clean dry skin of the whole face and neck, then factor 50 or higher sunscreen each morning.” to “To clean, dry skin of the whole face and neck, followed each morning by factor 50 or higher sunscreen.”, restoring the ER’s declarative construction.

Issues 12/09/2026 03:38

1. 4.5 — Sheet overflows one A4 page: Total content runs to roughly two A4 pages. The Key Interactions gate carries all twelve ER bullets with their full parenthetical drug lists (lines 589–623, wrapping to about 24 lines inside a half-width column), the Monitoring table reproduces the ER’s Target and Why cells near-verbatim across nine rows (lines 664–788), and the Protocol and Time-to-effect sub cells each run to three wrapped lines (lines 456–459, 470–474, 484–488, 504–507) instead of being condensed to the per-section budget.

Fixes 12/09/2026 03:38

1. 4.5 — Sheet condensed toward one page: Trimmed the Key Interactions example drug lists to the two leading agents per item (24 wrapped lines down to 17, all twelve ER labels and their parentheses retained), tightened the Monitoring Target and Why cells and the cadence line, shortened the Protocol and Time-to-effect sub cells from three wrapped lines to two, and compressed the two longer Contraindications and all five Qualitative Assessment items. No item was dropped from any section; every required span, list entry and marker row is unchanged in count.

Issues 12/09/2026 03:35

1. 11.4 — Radiance time-to-effect contradicts sub: time_1 pairs the value “8 weeks” (line 501) with the sub-claim “texture and radiance move fastest” (lines 504-507), which contradicts the 4-week values in time_2 and time_3.
2. 2.5 — Imperative in protocol sub-cell: action_1_sub (line 457) begins “Clean dry skin of the whole face and neck, …”, which reads as an instruction to the reader rather than a description of the ER protocol (ER line 328).

Fixes 12/09/2026 03:35

1. 11.4 — Radiance time-to-effect contradiction: Replaced the time_1_sub clause “texture and radiance move fastest” with “and expert-rated skin age fell over the same period”, removing the conflict with the 8-week value and the 4-week values in the other two cells.
2. 2.5 — Imperative in protocol sub-cell: Changed action_1_sub from “Clean dry skin of the whole face and neck, …” to “Applied to clean dry skin of the whole face and neck, …”, matching the ER’s descriptive phrasing instead of reading as an instruction.