Audit: QRS - Low-Level Light Therapy for Skin Rejuvenation

Audit conducted on 09/08/2026 14:38 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 91
Passed 81
Failed 0
N/A 10
Pass Rate 100.00%
  • Total = Passed + Failed + N/A
  • Pass Rate = Passed / (Passed + Failed) × 100
  • N/A items are excluded from the pass rate calculation

1. General Rules

# Description Result Comments
1.1 Every claim, magnitude, label, recommendation, and statement in the QRS is literally supported by content in the source ER. 🟢 Protocol values, time-to-effect ranges, benefit/risk tiers, contraindications, interactions, all 11 biomarker rows and all 8 qualitative markers trace to ER lines 379, 407–411, 468, 492–520.
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. 🟢 The ER’s precautionary qualifier for pregnancy is carried verbatim as “(precautionary avoidance only)”.
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”). 🟢 Scope qualifiers (“Active”, “Unshielded”, “Pulsed or flickering”, “in the treatment field”) are preserved so no gate is broadened or narrowed.
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 come from the ER’s “Populations who should avoid this intervention” bullet; Key Interactions from the ER interaction bullets; no Benefit- or Risk-Modifying Factor is surfaced as 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 of any kind appear in the QRS.

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. 🟢 Measured, evidence-first register matching the ER throughout.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Quantified protocol and monitoring content presented without hype or discouragement.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Content is stated descriptively (“Combining both is standard”, “the reference regimen”), not as instruction.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 No imperatives; the footer disclaimer reinforces the educational framing.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 No “recommended”, “should”, or “advised” appears in the QRS’s own voice.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person pronouns appear anywhere in the document.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Technical terms are limited to condition and biomarker names where precision is required.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Gate and tier items are single clauses; protocol sub-lines are one to two sentences.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 Confirmed — no “you”, “your”, or equivalent 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. 🟢 The 11-biomarker panel, dose arithmetic, and adherence-rate marker address a proactive, self-managing reader.
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. 🟢 A twice-weekly multi-month course with indefinite maintenance is presented without softening the 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. 🟢 Irradiance, fluence, and instrumented endpoints assume an engaged, effort-willing reader.
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 states benefit is modest and needs sustained use, matching the ER’s conclusion 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. 🟢 The term “anti-aging” does not appear anywhere in the QRS.
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. 🟢 “Erythema”, “photodermatoses”, “hyperpigmentation”, “sebum output” used in place of colloquial equivalents.

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 headings, gate titles, tier labels, and table column headers match the template byte-for-byte.
3.2 All “” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 All 34 template variable spans are present; the only additions are the repeated marker and qualitative rows the template defines as repeatable.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 A structural comparison against the template shows changes confined to variable regions; markup, CSS, comments, and the website= spans 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 used by the QRS is empty.
4.2 Where the ER presents a bulleted item as “Label: content”, the QRS uses the ER’s bold label verbatim as the cell or row label. 🟢 Protocol labels (“Standard clinic protocol (the reference regimen)”, “Wavelength selection”, “Dose per session”) and all eight qualitative labels are verbatim.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 No label deviates from the ER’s wording.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji characters occur in the file; the ER’s tier emojis were 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. 🟢 Every section is condensed to the per-section budget; gate and tier items are single clauses and no section carries ER-length prose.

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; it is the first element 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 “—” at line 3, closing “—” at 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 metadata value is 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: "00:03" is quoted, and it contains a colon.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 Line 4: er_filename: low_level_light_therapy_skin_2026-0808-1601_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: 2026-0809-1427.
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.
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 qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 Line 9 matches the actual 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: “Low-Level Light Therapy for Skin Rejuvenation - 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 the ER’s canonical_topic exactly.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 Line 421: “08/09/2026”, the correct reformatting of 2026-0809.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 Line 425: “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. 🟢 The header carries only the template’s title and subline; the ER’s “Also known as” line was correctly 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 both Conclusion paragraphs into what to expect, when, and at what cost.
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 in the ER Conclusion (lines 549 and 551).
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 No acronyms; “red and near-infrared light”, “wrinkle depth”, “collagen”, “firmness”, “moisture”, “tone” are all lay terms.
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trial is named or sized.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No percentages or statistics appear.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 All eight items derive from ER lines 365 and 379.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 Every absolute contraindication in the ER’s “Populations who should avoid this intervention” bullet is represented, plus the deliberately applied photosensitisers.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Lines 542–549, eight discrete <li> elements inside the span.
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 clauses (“— visible light directly provokes injury”, “— facial use is not implicated…”) are stripped; no item carries a trailing dash clause.
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). 🟢 Scope qualifiers survive either as parentheses (“precautionary avoidance only”) or folded into the item text (“Active”, “Unshielded”, “Pulsed or flickering”, “in the treatment field”, “until evaluated and treated”).
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’s contraindication bullets contain no ranking notation.
8.7 If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Eight stop items are present.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 All eight items derive from ER lines 363–379.
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 Photosensitising prescriptions, OTC photosensitisers, physical blockers, high-dose antioxidants, additive photosensitisers, pigment-prone/blue-light caution, other-intervention combinations, and the beneficial-additive supplements; no overlap with the stop items.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Lines 557–564, eight discrete <li> elements inside the span.
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. 🟢 The ER’s “consequence:” and “Mitigating action:” clauses are stripped throughout; no trailing dash clause remains.
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). 🟢 Drug-class examples, the 1,000 mg/day vitamin C threshold, and the Fitzpatrick IV–VI staging are all carried.
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’s interaction bullets contain no ranking notation.
9.7 If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Eight caution items are present.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 All three cells derive from ER Therapeutic Protocol lines 407, 409, and 411.
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Reference regimen, wavelength selection, and dose per session are the three parameters the ER treats as protocol-determining.
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 more than three actionable aspects and 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 carry substantive ER-derived content; no placeholder remains.

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 🟢 Wrinkle depth/volume, dermal collagen density and roughness, and blinded-rater appearance — the three endpoints in the ER’s “Time to effect” bullet (line 468).
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 The order mirrors the ER’s High-tier benefit ordering: wrinkle reduction, then collagen density/roughness, then blinded-rater appearance.
11.3 If less that three distinct time-to-effect aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing. N/A Three distinct time-to-effect aspects are present and 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 fields carry ER-derived content, including the 30-sessions/15-weeks and 8/12/16-week figures.
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 an explicit time-to-effect bullet, so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 All twelve entries correspond to the twelve ER benefit sub-headings.
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four spans are populated with the matching ER tier contents.
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 entry is the ER sub-heading reduced to a noun phrase; no magnitudes or narrative carried over.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parentheses appear in any benefits entry.
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 benefit tiers have items in the ER.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 All ten entries correspond to the ten ER risk sub-headings.
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four spans are populated with the matching ER tier contents.
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. 🟢 Each entry is the ER sub-heading reduced to a noun phrase; magnitudes and mechanism text are dropped.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parentheses appear in any risks entry.
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 have items in the ER.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Rows and cadence derive from the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success table and lines 492–508.
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All eleven ER biomarkers are present with their optimal functional ranges unchanged.
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 728 condenses ER line 494: imaging at 4, 8 and 12–16 weeks then 6-monthly, labs 6–12 monthly, field examination annually.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 All eight items derive from the ER’s qualitative marker list at lines 512–519.
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All eight ER qualitative markers are present with their bold labels verbatim.

Issues 09/08/2026 14:38

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 09/08/2026 14:35

  1. 1.1 — Lupus entity renamed: The Contraindications gate (line 543) names “visible-light-provoked cutaneous lupus erythematosus”, whereas the ER (line 379) specifies “visible-light-provoked systemic lupus erythematosus with cutaneous involvement” — a different diagnostic entity.

Fixes 09/08/2026 14:35

  1. 1.1 — Lupus entity restored to ER wording: Contraindication item 2 changed from “visible-light-provoked cutaneous lupus erythematosus” to “visible-light-provoked systemic lupus erythematosus with cutaneous involvement”, matching ER line 379.