Audit: QRS - EMDR for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 11/09/2026 02:31 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.	🟢	Every span traces to ER text: protocol cells to Therapeutic Protocol, time cells to the Time to effect bullet, benefit/risk tiers to the ER tier headings, all 11 markers and the 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.	🟢	marker_7_target and marker_10_target both retain “No established target”; no ER hedge is dropped.
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”).	🟢	Caution/Monitor tags in caution_items match the ER verbatim; contraindication qualifiers (“within 30 days”, “within 6 weeks”, “without a safety plan”) are unchanged in force.
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_items come only from “Populations who should avoid EMDR”; caution_items only from the interaction bullets; no Benefit- or Risk-Modifying Factor content appears in either gate.
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 of any kind in the QRS body.

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.	🟢	at_a_glance mirrors the ER Conclusion register, including its even-handed treatment of the eye-movement dispute and the harms gap.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Leads with where the evidence is strongest, then states the limits; gates and markers give actionable handles rather than warnings alone.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Declarative throughout (“Late-evening sessions generally avoided”), no imperatives.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No prescriptive verbs; the footer disclaimer is the template’s own.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No instance of “recommend”, “advise”, or “should” in the QRS 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	🟢	Technical terms carry the ER’s own lay glosses: “(heart attack)”, “(fight-or-flight)”, “(rest-and-digest)”, “(sedative anti-anxiety drugs: …)”.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Every item is a fragment; rationale sentences from the ER bullets are stripped throughout.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed: no “you”/”your” in the document.
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.	🟢	Functional targets (PCL-5 below 20, hs-CRP below 1.0 mg/L, BP below 120/80) are pitched at optimisers, not at conventional clinical cut-offs.
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.	🟢	An 8-to-12-session course with weekly scales and repeat physical markers at three and six-to-twelve months assumes exactly that commitment.
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 simplified “ask your doctor” framing; the monitoring table assumes self-directed tracking.
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.	🟢	at_a_glance foregrounds the unresolved mechanism and the near-empty harms record, which is the weighting a risk-aware optimiser needs.
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 title uses “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)”; “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.	🟢	“myocardial infarction”, “dissociative disorder”, “gabapentinoids”, “heart-rate variability (rMSSD)” — clinical register held; lay glosses are parenthetical, mirroring the ER.

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 strings byte-identical to the template (lines 440, 477, 519, 539, 552, 573, 592, 596-598, 733 and the four tier labels in each of the Benefits and Risks cards).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	Diff of span names against the template: all 38 template names present (marker_#* expanded to 1-11, qualitative_item# to 1-7), 74 spans total, no missing, no extra, no duplicates.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	<span website="evidence_review">, <span website="audit"> and <span website="full_review"> are untouched; a full diff against the template shows differences only inside data-qrs-var spans and the metadata block.

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 that feeds the QRS is empty; every benefit and risk tier, both gate lists, the protocol, the monitoring table and the qualitative list are populated in the ER.
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 eight-phase protocol”, “Typical course length”, “Best time of day” and all nine interaction labels are carried verbatim, including their parentheticals.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	All 11 marker names match the ER biomarker table exactly; time labels (“Single-incident trauma”, “Depression”, “Chronic pain”) are the ER’s own terms.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	Zero emoji in the file; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” marker on the Medium risk was correctly dropped.
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.	🟢	Each section is condensed to its minimum: tier items collapsed to semicolon-separated fragments, gate items reduced to label plus Caution/Monitor, marker “Why” cells trimmed to one clause, cadence compressed to a single line.

---

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 metadata comment immediately follows <!doctype html> on line 1.
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 preamble text sits on line 2.
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; none of its values are repeated in the body.
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 so because it contains a colon; all other values are bare and trimmed.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: emdr_2026-0911-0002_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]”	🟢	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: 2026-0911-0207, correct format.
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 plus version, no context-window or other qualifier appended.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: qrs_filename: emdr_2026-0911-0002_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 git_user: evipedia-2 and git_issue: 6011; no stray whitespace or 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 22: EMDR for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet; ER canonical_topic is “EMDR for Health & Longevity”.
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., & for &)	🟢	Line 417: EMDR for Health & Longevity.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: 09/11/2026, correctly derived from 2026-0911-0207.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: Opus 5, matching the frontmatter value.
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 the title and the template subline; the ER’s “Also known as” line was 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	🟢	Line 433 condenses all four movements of the ER Conclusion: what the course is, where evidence is strongest, where it is weaker, and the two caveats.
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 of the five clauses maps to a distinct sentence in the ER Conclusion (lines 473-477).
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms; “PTSD” is rendered as “lasting stress reactions after frightening events” and depression as “low mood anchored to painful memories”.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No study names, years or sample sizes appear.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numeric results; “weaker trials” and “nearly absent” are qualitative.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All six items come from “Populations who should avoid EMDR” (ER lines 307-312).
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All six ER bullets are present, none added.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Six <li> elements inside the stop_items span (lines 542-547).
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 trailing rationale “given the sympathetic arousal of reprocessing” is stripped from the cardiovascular item; no dashes introduce explanatory clauses anywhere.
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).	🟢	“(within 30 days)”, “(heart attack)”, “within 6 weeks”, “without a safety plan” and the light-stimulation scope condition 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 its contraindication bullets.
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 six such populations and the section is correctly populated, not empty.
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 one-to-one to the ER interaction bullets (ER lines 287-303).
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	All nine ER interactions present; no overlap with the six contraindications.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine <li> elements inside the caution_items span (lines 555-563).
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.	🟢	Each item reduces to bold label plus “Caution” or “Monitor”; the ER’s mechanistic sentences are all 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).	🟢	Every ER example-drug list is carried verbatim; the “Other interventions” item retains MDMA-assisted therapy, ketamine and psilocybin so the gate stays interpretable.
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 its interaction 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 lists nine interactions and the section is correctly 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	🟢	All three cells derive from ER Therapeutic Protocol bullets (lines 334, 336, 348).
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Phase structure, course length/session dosing, and session timing are the three decisions a reader must make; variant protocols and comparator therapies are correctly not surfaced.
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 well over three actionable aspects; 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 spans carry substantive ER-derived content; action_1_sub lists the eight named phases, action_2_sub gives session length and frequency.

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	🟢	Matches the ER Practical Considerations “Time to effect” bullet (line 391) exactly: single-incident trauma, depression, chronic pain.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	PTSD (SMD −2.07) → depression (g −1.07) → chronic pain (no pooled estimate, mixed effects), matching the descending magnitudes in Expected Benefits.
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 supplies three distinct aspects; all three sets are used.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine spans populated; time_3_sub carries the ER’s “further gains accruing after the course ends”.
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 does provide time-to-effect information, so the subhead and row are correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All nine benefit headings from ER lines 151-209 are represented in the matching tier.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated (lines 521-532).
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 bare outcome phrases; no magnitudes, trial counts or bias caveats carried across.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses appear 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.	N/A	The ER populates all four benefit tiers, so no span needed hiding.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All six risk headings from ER lines 229-269 are represented in the matching tier.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated (lines 575-586).
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 outcome phrases only; the ER’s incidence figures (10.0% vs 28.0%, 9.18 points) are not carried over.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses in any risks span; the ER’s “(feeling detached from oneself)” and “(a sudden flood of the original emotion)” glosses are dropped.
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	The ER populates all four risk tiers, so no span needed hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Table and cadence both derive from Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success (ER lines 419-435).
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All 11 ER table rows present in ER order: PCL-5, PHQ-9, SUD, VOC, DES-II, resting heart rate, rMSSD, blood pressure, hs-CRP, DHEA-S to cortisol ratio, sleep efficiency.
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.	🟢	Line 727 condenses ER line 421 plus the DES-II row’s “administer at intake and only repeat if reactions warrant”.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All items come from the qualitative-markers list at ER lines 439-445.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All seven ER qualitative markers present, in ER order, none added.

Issues 11/09/2026 02:31

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 11/09/2026 02:25

1. 1.1 — Benefit direction dropped: In benefits_medium (line 525) the ER heading “Reduction in Personality Disorder Symptoms” (ER line 191) is condensed to the bare fragment “personality disorder symptoms”, which sits after “improved blood pressure and autonomic balance in hypertension” and so no longer inherits the leading “Reduction in”; as written the item states no direction of effect.

Fixes 11/09/2026 02:25

1. 1.1 — Benefit direction restored: In benefits_medium the bare fragment “personality disorder symptoms” was changed to “reduction in personality disorder symptoms” and moved ahead of the blood-pressure item, so each Medium benefit now carries its own direction of effect.

Issues 11/09/2026 02:17

1. 4.5 — One-page A4 budget exceeded: The combined content volume overruns a single A4 page; the Key Interactions gate runs 9 items to roughly 17 wrapped lines, the Monitoring table carries 11 rows plus a 3-line cadence sentence, and action_1_sub (line 450) wraps to four lines inside a one-third-width column.
2. 8.5 — Dissociative disorder specifier dropped: The sixth contraindication (line 547) drops the ER’s severity specifier “including dissociative identity disorder” (ER line 312) entirely instead of shortening it, which is inconsistent with the cardiovascular item that retains its “including …” specifier.

Fixes 11/09/2026 02:17

1. 8.5 — Dissociative disorder specifier restored: The sixth contraindication now reads “Severe untreated dissociative disorder, including dissociative identity disorder, without specialist-led extended preparation”, restoring the ER severity specifier that had been dropped.
2. 4.5 — Protocol sub-cells condensed: action_1_sub shortened by collapsing “installation of a positive belief” to “installation”, and action_2_sub / action_3_sub trimmed of filler verbs, removing a wrapped line from each one-third-width column.
3. 4.5 — Benefits tiers de-duplicated: Repeated “reduction in” stems removed from the High and Medium benefit lines, cutting the Benefits card from roughly five wrapped lines to three.
4. 4.5 — Monitoring cells tightened: Six “Why” cells and three “Target” cells shortened (e.g. “A general marker of body-wide inflammation, plausibly responsive to chronic stress load” to “Body-wide inflammation, plausibly responsive to chronic stress load”), reducing multi-line table rows.
5. 4.5 — Cadence and qualitative items trimmed: monitoring_cadence reduced from 236 to 200 characters, and qualitative item 6 shortened to “no longer routed around”, keeping each to a single wrapped line.

Issues 11/09/2026 02:11

1. 1.2 / 1.3 — Eye-movement hedge dropped: [at_a_glance] at line 433 states “The eye movements have never been shown to add anything”, strengthening the ER Conclusion (line 475), which reads “has never been convincingly shown to add anything beyond what other trauma-focused therapies deliver” and which the ER Mechanism section (line 133) qualifies further with a dismantling meta-analysis that “found a moderate additive effect. The dispute remains live.”

Fixes 11/09/2026 02:11

1. 1.2 / 1.3 — Eye-movement hedge restored: In [at_a_glance] (line 433) changed “have never been shown to add anything” to “have never been convincingly shown to add anything”, matching the ER Conclusion’s hedge; the lede stays within the 60-word limit.