Audit: QRS - Electrical Muscle Stimulation for Muscle Growth

Audit conducted on 13/09/2026 17:41 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 93
Passed 83
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. 🟢 Protocol values (85 Hz, 350 µs, 6 s/4 s, 20 min, ~50% MVC, 63%), time-to-effect windows, all 10 contraindications, all 9 interactions, all 10 biomarkers and all 6 qualitative markers trace to ER lines 300-311, 282-298, 337-343, 393, 419-441.
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 ER hedge is restated in stronger terms; tiered descriptors carry evidence strength via the tier label as section 12/13 prescribe.
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”). 🟢 Absolute contraindications stay in the stop gate; the relative pair (malignancy, diabetic neuropathy) retains “(relative; medical clearance required)”.
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. 🟢 Stop and caution gates draw only from ER Key Interactions & Contraindications; benefits from Expected Benefits; risks from Potential Risks & Side Effects.
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 IDs, author names or brand names appear anywhere in the QRS.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No attributions present.

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. 🟢 Phrasing is lifted or lightly condensed from the ER throughout.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Lede opens with the established benefit before stating the damage trade-off.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Content is stated as findings and ranges, not instructions.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 No imperatives; the sole clearance reference mirrors the ER’s own relative-contraindication wording.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 No “recommended”, “should be used”, or equivalent in the document’s own voice.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person pronouns anywhere in the file.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Abbreviated markers are spelled out on first use (eGFR, hsTnT, hsCRP, ASMI, CK).
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Gate items and tier lines are single clauses; magnitudes and mechanisms are stripped.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 Confirmed; 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. 🟢 Optimal-range targets and the graded-risk framing address exactly this 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. 🟢 Laboratory monitoring and supervised session protocols are presented without hedging about burden.
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. 🟢 No simplification to general-population 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. 🟢 The lede names the sedentary/immobilised/ageing subgroups where the signal is largest and flags the first-weeks hazard.
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. 🟢 The string “anti-aging” does not occur.
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. 🟢 Formal register maintained (“maximal voluntary contraction”, “rhabdomyolysis”, “appendicular skeletal muscle mass index”).

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 match the template byte-for-byte (lines 440, 477, 519, 539, 556, 577, 596, 600-602, 726).
3.2 All “” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 All 34 template variables present; the repeatable rows are expanded to marker_1-10 and qualitative_item_1-6.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 Structural diff against the template shows no change outside variable content; the website=”evidence_review”, website=”audit” and website=”full_review” spans and the CSS block 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 source 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. 🟢 “Standard whole-body regimen”, “Session frequency”, “Intensity threshold” match ER lines 337, 339, 343 verbatim.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Protocol labels, tier labels and biomarker names are carried unchanged from the ER.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji characters in the file; the ER’s ⭕️/⚠️ flags were dropped as required.
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 gate item, tier line and table cell is reduced to a single clause; list lengths are those mandated by items 8.2, 9.2, 14.2 and 15.2.

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, immediately after the 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. 🟢 Opening “—” line 3, closing “—” line 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 an HTML comment; no element repeats it.
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: "00:02" 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 names electrical_muscle_stimulation_muscle_2026-0913-1520_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: 26.9.11, matching the QRS.md 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: 2026-0913-1730.
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: 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) 🟢 Single word, no version.
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: 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” carries no extra qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 Line 9 matches 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.

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 &) 🟢 “Electrical Muscle Stimulation for Muscle Growth - Quick Reference Sheet”; no characters require encoding.
6.2 [header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., &amp; for &) 🟢 Line 417 matches ER frontmatter canonical_topic exactly.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 2026-0913-1730 → 09/13/2026.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 “Opus 5”.
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 holds only title and the template 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 ER lines 461-463: efficacy, volume-matched parity, responder groups, absent bone/tendon loading, damage trade-off.
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words 🟢 Exactly 60 words.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Each clause maps to a distinct sentence of the ER Conclusion.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 No acronyms; “severe muscle breakdown” is used in place of rhabdomyolysis.
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trial identifiers.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No SMDs, confidence intervals or percentages.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Taken from the “Populations who should avoid” list, ER lines 302-311.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 All 10 ER entries are present, in ER order.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Ten <li> elements, lines 542-551.
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. 🟢 The ER’s “— absolute contraindication in German consensus” attributions on epilepsy and arteriosclerosis are stripped; no trailing dash clause remains.
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, CKD stage 4, 3-month rhabdomyolysis window, CK above 5× upper limit, 160/100 mmHg, 8-week surgical window and the relative/clearance class are all retained.
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 uses no ranking notation in this list.
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 ER names such populations and the section is populated.
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 🟢 Taken from ER lines 282-298.
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 All 9 ER interaction bullets present; none duplicates a stop item.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Nine <li> elements, lines 559-567.
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. 🟢 Mechanism and mitigation sentences are dropped; only the agent class and its qualifier remain.
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). 🟢 Named example drugs are kept for all four drug classes, and the 48–72 hour window is kept for eccentric training; the “monitor” / “no caution required” classes are retained.
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 uses no ranking notation in these bullets.
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 ER names nine such interactions and the section is populated.
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 🟢 Drawn from ER Therapeutic Protocol, lines 337-343.
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Standard whole-body regimen, session frequency and intensity threshold — the dose, the schedule and the parameter the ER identifies as decisive.
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 provides more than three; all three 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. 🟢 All nine fields populated; values (20 min, 85 Hz, 350 µs; 1 session per week; above ~50% MVC) match the ER.

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 🟢 Muscle size, maximal strength and whole-body lean mass — the three windows given at ER line 393.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Muscle mass/size (SMD 1.23) precedes maximal strength (SMD 0.98); whole-body lean mass follows as the slowest scan-measured endpoint.
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 three distinct aspects; all sets are used.
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢 8 weeks, 4 weeks and 12–16 weeks with their ER-sourced qualifiers.
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 🟢 All four tiers map to ER lines 142-200.
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four spans present and 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. 🟢 Each tier is a semicolon-separated list of the ER’s benefit headings only.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No SMDs, confidence intervals or study names carried over.
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 All four tiers have ER content.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 All four tiers map to ER lines 222-262.
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four spans present and 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. 🟢 Only the ER’s risk headings are carried.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 The 117-fold CK figure and all trial detail are absent.
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 tiers have ER content.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Taken from ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success, lines 421-432.
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All 10 ER table rows present with matching optimal ranges and rationales.
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. 🟢 Reproduces the ER cadence paragraph at line 419.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Taken from the qualitative-marker list, ER lines 436-441.
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All 6 ER qualitative markers present, in ER order.

Issues 13/09/2026 17:41

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 13/09/2026 17:34

  1. 1.3 — At-a-glance overstates parity scope: Line 433 attaches “roughly matching weight training when training volume is matched” to both lean tissue and maximal strength, whereas the ER Conclusion (line 461) restricts the volume-matched equivalence to strength gains only.

Fixes 13/09/2026 17:34

  1. 1.3 — At-a-glance parity scope narrowed: Rewrote the [at_a_glance] clause from “roughly matching weight training when training volume is matched” to “with strength gains roughly matching weight training when volume is matched”, restricting the volume-matched equivalence to strength as the ER Conclusion does; the lede remains within the 60-word limit.