Audit: QRS - Extraction of Root-Canal-Treated Teeth for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 29/08/2026 08:02 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. 🟢 At-a-glance is near-verbatim from ER Conclusion; protocol cells from ER Therapeutic Protocol; gates from Key Interactions & Contraindications; tiers from Expected Benefits / Potential Risks & Side Effects; all 7 markers and 5 qualitative items from 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. 🟢 “Claimed over 3–6 months” (time_2_value) preserves the ER’s hedged “Any systemic change is claimed over 3–6 months”; speculative tier retained for the systemic/autoimmune claims.
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”). 🟢 Tier assignments match the ER exactly; “associated with tooth loss” and “in antiresorptive users” qualifiers retained so risks are not overstated.
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 drawn only from the ER’s absolute contraindication and “Populations who should avoid” list; cautions only from ER caution bullets; no modifying factor is promoted into a 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. 🟢 The QRS contains no PMIDs, citations, expert names, NCT identifiers, or brand names.
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. 🟢 Matches the ER’s evenly sceptical framing: infection persistence granted, removal benefit unproven, costs measured.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Presents both camps’ protocols and a measurable monitoring baseline, enabling an informed decision rather than steering one.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Descriptive throughout; no imperatives.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 Gates and monitoring are stated as facts and intervals, not instructions.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 No instances of “recommend”, “advise”, “should”, or “must”.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person pronouns anywhere in the document.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Technical terms retained only where they are the decision-relevant clinical identity (e.g., “international normalised ratio”, “absolute neutrophil count”); at-a-glance is fully plain.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Tier items are semicolon-chained headings; gate items are label plus parenthetical only.
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. 🟢 Framed around elective removal of an asymptomatic root-filled tooth, matching the ER’s stated framing.
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. 🟢 Assumes willingness to undertake three-dimensional imaging, staged extraction, and specialty-laboratory marker testing (RANTES/CCL5).
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. 🟢 Monitoring panel includes non-standard markers (interleukin-6, RANTES/CCL5) well beyond general-population dental care.
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 missing outcome evidence and the permanent bone cost — the weighting a proactive adult considering elective removal 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 appear; 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)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt. 🟢 Formal terminology used throughout the cards and gates; the plain wording in at-a-glance is required by item 7.4 and mirrors the ER’s own Conclusion phrasing.

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, gate headings, tier labels, and column headers are byte-identical to the template.
3.2 All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 60 unique data-qrs-var spans present: all 34 fixed spans, plus marker_1..7_{name,target,why} (21) and qualitative_item_1..5 (5).
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 The three website= spans (evidence_review, audit, full_review) are unchanged; a full diff against the template shows no structural or CSS modification.

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 is empty; the ER’s High/Medium benefit tiers carry explanatory prose, and item 12.5 governs their handling in the QRS.
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 cell labels “Case selection”, “Conventional endodontic approach”, “Integrative or biological approach” are verbatim ER bold labels; caution items reuse the ER bold labels verbatim.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Time-to-effect cell labels (“Local symptoms”, “Systemic change”, “Surgical healing”) are lifted from the ER’s own sentence subjects, not invented; monitoring row labels match the ER biomarker table.
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” markers are 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. 🟢 Six ER Medium risks condensed into one semicolon-chained line; ER glosses stripped from gate items; no section extended beyond the template’s single-page grid.

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. 🟢 Comment opens at line 2, immediately after <!doctype html> at 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 --- at line 3, closing --- at line 13; the preceding title text sits before the opener.
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 closed at line 14; no metadata value is echoed 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. 🟢 All values trimmed; only duration: "00:03" is quoted, which is required because it contains a colon.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 Line 4: er_filename: extraction_of_root_canal_treated_teeth_2026-0829-0502_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 badge version.
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: 2026-0829-0748.
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 only.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 Line 9 matches the actual on-disk filename exactly.
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; 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., &amp; for &) 🟢 Line 22: “Extraction of Root-Canal-Treated Teeth 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 &) 🟢 Line 417 matches the ER canonical_topic with &amp; encoding.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 Line 421: “08/29/2026”, correctly derived from 2026-0829-0748.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 Line 425: “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. 🟢 Header is byte-identical to the template apart from the two substituted variables; the ER’s “Also known as” line is 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 the ER Conclusion’s two load-bearing paragraphs into the decision frame: infection real, outcome evidence absent, bone cost measured, retention rate high.
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words 🟢 58 words.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Each of the five sentences maps to a distinct Conclusion passage, most near-verbatim.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 No acronyms; “jawbone”, “root tip”, “bacteria”, “treated roots” throughout — “apical periodontitis” and “alveolar” are deliberately avoided here.
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 numbers at all; “a large minority” replaces the ER’s 39% figure.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 All seven items trace to that section — one from the absolute-contraindication bullet, six from “Populations who should avoid”.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 Complete: the ER lists exactly one absolute contraindication bullet plus six avoid-populations, and all seven appear.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Seven discrete <li> elements inside the stop_items span (lines 566–578).
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. 🟢 No dashes or trailing clauses; ER mitigation text and lay glosses (“a radiation dose unit”, “heart attack”) are 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). 🟢 “within the previous 12 months”, “exceeding 60 gray”, “below 1.0 × 10⁹/L”, “below 50 × 10⁹/L”, “within the last 90 days”, “above 3.5” all preserved; drug examples retained in item 1.
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 inside parentheses in this section.
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 several such populations, and the section is correctly populated rather than 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 six items map one-to-one to ER caution bullets.
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 The ER’s seven interaction bullets minus the antiresorptive/antiangiogenic bullet (correctly promoted to Contraindications) yields exactly the six items present.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Six discrete <li> elements inside the caution_items span (lines 586–606).
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 ER “Caution — … Mitigation: …” clause is stripped; only the label and its drug list remain, with no dashes.
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 five drug/supplement lists preserved in full, including the <em>Ginkgo biloba</em> italicisation; only the inline gloss for platelet-rich fibrin is trimmed.
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 inside parentheses in this section.
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 identifies six such 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 come from ER Therapeutic Protocol bullets (lines 320, 324, 328).
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Case selection (the decision itself) plus the two competing approaches — the ER’s own organising axis; the remaining bullets are modifiers and interest notes.
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 at least three distinct actionable aspects, so 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 ER-derived content; no placeholder text remains anywhere in the file.

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 🟢 Local symptoms and systemic change from Practical Considerations line 371; surgical healing from Discontinuation & Cycling line 347.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Local symptom resolution (Low tier) first, systemic change (Speculative) second, healing timeline last.
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 time-to-effect aspects, so 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; “Days to weeks”, “Claimed over 3–6 months”, and “2–3 weeks to 6 months” each trace to explicit ER intervals.
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 section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 Both populated tiers reproduce the ER’s benefit subsection headings.
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four spans present (lines 543–556).
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. 🟢 Headings only; the ER’s 39% prevalence figure, confidence interval, and indirect-evidence caveats are all omitted.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical content remains in either populated tier.
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 High or Medium; both spans carry style="display: none" with empty content (lines 543–544) and no empty-state text.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 All four tiers reproduce the ER’s risk subsection headings in ER order.
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four spans present and populated (lines 618–637).
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. 🟢 All six ER Medium risks reduced to their headings and semicolon-chained; the ER’s relative risks, hazard ratios, and incidence percentages are all omitted.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parentheses remain; the ER’s inline glosses (e.g., “painful failure of the blood clot to form or hold”) are 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 All four risk tiers contain items in the ER, so no span needed hiding.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 All rows come from the biomarker table in ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success (lines 395–403).
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All 7 ER biomarkers present with targets and rationales matching the ER verbatim: hs-CRP, interleukin-6, glycated haemoglobin, 25-hydroxyvitamin D, fibrinogen, white blood cell count with differential, RANTES/CCL5.
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 751–754 condense the ER’s one-week/one-month clinical review, three- and six-month radiographic and blood follow-up, and 6–12 month thereafter interval.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 All five items come from the ER’s qualitative marker list (lines 407–411).
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All 5 ER qualitative markers present verbatim: chewing comfort, facial/jaw/referred pain, sinus and nasal symptoms, sleep quality, daytime energy and cognitive clarity.

Issues 29/08/2026 08:02

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 29/08/2026 07:56

  1. 11.2 — Time cells not ordered by benefit: The Time to Effect cells run chronologically; “Surgical healing” (lines 508–521), which relates to no ER benefit, is placed ahead of “Systemic change” (lines 522–535), which relates to the ER’s two Speculative benefits.

Fixes 29/08/2026 07:56

  1. 11.2 — Time cells reordered by benefit: Swapped the second and third Time to Effect cells so “Systemic change”, which relates to the ER’s Speculative benefits, now precedes “Surgical healing”, which relates to no ER benefit.