Audit: QRS - Nicotinamide Riboside for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 25/08/2026 08:53 using AI4L / Opus 5

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.	🟢	Every cell traces to ER text: protocol cells to ER lines 354–358, time cells to ER line 415, benefit/risk items to the ER tier headings, monitoring rows to the ER biomarker table (ER 447–454), cadence to ER 443, qualitative items to ER 458–462.
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.	🟢	Hedges carried through: “No established target” (marker_1_target), “no functional outcome has appeared that quickly” (time_3_sub), “no additional functional benefit has been demonstrated” (action_3_sub), “Speculative” tiers retained for the cancer and NAD+-depletion items.
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”).	🟢	The ER’s avoid-list populations (ER 325–330) all appear under Contraindications at full strength; no interaction is downgraded and no speculative benefit is promoted above its ER tier.
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.	🟢	Benefits come only from `Expected Benefits`, risks only from `Potential Risks & Side Effects`, gates only from `Key Interactions & Contraindications`. No Benefit- or Risk-Modifying Factor (ER 210–222, 284–294) is surfaced anywhere.
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 carries no PMIDs, no NCT numbers, no expert names and no brand names (Niagen, Tru Niagen, Thorne, Elysium are all absent).
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions of any kind appear in the sheet.

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.	🟢	The sheet mirrors the ER’s sceptical, target-engagement-versus-function framing, including the funding caveat and the challenged premise from the ER `Conclusion`.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Tiered benefits/risks, quantified targets and an explicit statement of what is and is not supported give the reader a basis to decide rather than a verdict to accept.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Content is stated as observed practice and trial-derived figures (“the dose at which whole-blood NAD+ rises about 50%”), not as instructions issued to a patient.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No prescriptive verbs in the QRS’s own voice; the Monitoring cadence is phrased as a schedule description, not an order.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No occurrence of “recommend”, “advise”, “should” or equivalent in any populated span.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns anywhere in the populated spans (verified by search for “you”/”your”).
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are spelled out rather than abbreviated (“Whole-blood nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide”, “High-sensitivity C-reactive protein”), and the At-A-Glance uses “narrowed leg arteries” and “cell-energy molecule”.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Gate items are bare noun phrases, benefit/risk tiers are semicolon-separated fragments, and monitoring rows are three short columns.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed — no direct address in any QRS-authored span.
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 sheet assumes a reader who will run an eight-marker baseline panel and track a dose against an upper intake limit.
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.	🟢	Baseline plus 8–12-week plus 6-month laboratory panels, monthly home blood pressure and quarterly walking tests are all presented without hedging on effort.
2.12	The document is NOT written for the general population, who are unwilling to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes or follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢	Optimal functional ranges (hs-CRP below 1.0 mg/L, ALT below 25/20 U/L, HbA1c 4.8–5.4%) are tighter than conventional laboratory cut-offs, which addresses the optimizing reader only.
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 At-A-Glance states plainly that the functional evidence is thin and that healthy-population gains are absent, which is the distinction that matters to a longevity-oriented user.
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 header uses “Health & Longevity” per the ER canonical topic.
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.	🟢	“adverse events”, “hypersensitivity”, “hepatic impairment”, “estimated glomerular filtration rate” are used throughout; the plainer At-A-Glance wording is required by item 7.4.

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 present verbatim (lines 445, 490, 532, 560, 574, 596, 625, 738) and the Monitoring headers are “Marker”, “Target”, “Why” (lines 629–631).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	63 `data-qrs-var` spans present and unique: page_title, header (4), at_a_glance, action_1–3 (9), time_1–3 (9), benefits (4), stop/caution (2), risks (4), marker_1–8 (24), monitoring_cadence, qualitative_item_1–5. None dropped, none duplicated.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	The non-variable spans `website="evidence_review"`, `website="audit"` and `website="full_review"` are untouched (lines 423, 426, 439), as are the template’s structural comments.

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; every ER section the QRS draws on is populated.
4.2	Where the ER presents a bulleted item as “Label: content”, the QRS uses the ER’s bold label verbatim as the cell or row label.	🟢	ER `Therapeutic Protocol` bold labels are reused exactly: “Standard dose” (ER 354), “Best time of day” (ER 358), “Research dose range” (ER 356).
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	All eight marker names match the ER biomarker table verbatim, including “Prostate-specific antigen, men over 45”; no abbreviation (ALT, hs-CRP, HbA1c, PSA) is substituted for the spelled-out ER name.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji in the file; the ER’s 🟩/🟥/🟨 tier markers and ⚠️ Conflicted flags were dropped and replaced by the CSS-styled cards and `<strong>` tier labels.
4.5	The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page.	🟢	Every section is condensed rather than transcribed: tier items are collapsed into single semicolon-separated lines, marker_1_target is shortened from the ER’s longer phrasing, and the cadence paragraph is reduced from two ER paragraphs to two sentences.

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.	🟢	The comment opens on line 2, immediately after `<!doctype html>` on line 1, and precedes the template comment on line 16.
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 descriptive text on line 2 sits before the opening delimiter.
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.	🟢	The block is inside an HTML comment and none of its values are echoed by a visible element.
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 requiring YAML quoting; 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: nicotinamide_riboside_2026-0825-0608_Opus_ER.md`, matching the source ER.
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: 2026-0825-0848`, in the required 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” is a single word with 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” is nickname plus version number with no trailing qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: `qrs_filename: nicotinamide_riboside_2026-0825-0608_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; no stray whitespace and no unnecessary quoting.

#	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: “Nicotinamide Riboside for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”, matching ER `canonical_topic` with the ampersand encoded.
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: “Nicotinamide Riboside for Health & Longevity”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: “08/25/2026”, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of `qrs_creation_date: 2026-0825-0848`.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: “Opus 5”, matching `qrs_creator_ai_fullname`.
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	The header carries only the title and the template subline; the ER’s “Also known as” line (ER 30) 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	🟢	Condenses all four Conclusion paragraphs (ER 488–492): reliable target engagement, thin functional evidence, mild side effects, sponsor funding, and the challenged premise.
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.	🟢	“narrowed leg arteries” → ER 488; “slight motor gains in early Parkinson’s” → ER 488; “no gain in strength or walking speed in older adults” → ER 488; “Side effects mild” → ER 490; “funded by sellers” → ER 492; “questions the reason for taking it” → ER 492.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms; “NAD+” is rendered as “the cell-energy molecule” and peripheral artery disease as “narrowed leg arteries”.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial name, year, enrolment figure or p-value appears.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numbers at all beyond the compound name “vitamin B3”.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	All seven items map to the “Populations who should avoid Nicotinamide Riboside” list at ER 323–330 and the NAMPT-inhibitor bullet at ER 303.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All six ER avoid-list bullets are represented; the combined hepatic/renal bullet (ER 329) is split into two items, giving seven `<li>` entries with no omissions.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 563–569: seven well-formed `<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 clause “— excluded from every trial and from the European novel-food authorisation” (ER 327) is stripped to “Pregnant and lactating women”; no item contains a dash-led clause; the leading “Anyone with/receiving” is trimmed.
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).	🟢	“(Child-Pugh Class B or C)”, “(estimated glomerular filtration rate below 30 mL/min/1.73 m²)”, “within the past 5 years” and “under 18 years” 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 inside parentheses in its contraindication 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 does identify such populations and the section is correspondingly 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	🟢	All ten items map to the ER interaction bullets at ER 299–321.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	PARP inhibitors, NAMPT inhibitors and cytotoxic chemotherapy are correctly excluded as Contraindications, while radiotherapy — the half of ER bullet 299 that is not contraindicated — is retained as its own item.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 577–586: ten well-formed `<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 “— caution, oncologist decision”, “— monitor”, “— additive, cap total intake”, “— potentiating, caution”, “— antagonistic” clauses and their following sentences are all stripped; no item exceeds one noun phrase.
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 lists retained: “(amlodipine, lisinopril, losartan)”, “(niacin, nicotinamide, nicotinamide mononucleotide, NADH)”, “(trimethylglycine, methylfolate, vitamin B12)”, “(pterostilbene, resveratrol)”, “(apigenin, quercetin)”.
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 parenthetical drug lists are already plain comma-separated; no ranking notation is used.
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 twelve interaction bullets and the section is correspondingly 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 at ER 354, 356 and 358.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Standard dose, timing and the research dose range are the three bullets that determine what a user actually takes and when; the remaining ER bullets are competing-approach commentary and population qualifiers.
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 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 populated; e.g. action_1_sub “the dose at which whole-blood NAD+ rises about 50% within two weeks” reproduces ER 354, and action_3_sub “6–24 weeks in trials; above 1000 mg no additional functional benefit” reproduces ER 356.

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	🟢	The three intervals named in the ER `Practical Considerations` time-to-effect bullet (ER 415) are all carried over: six months for walking distance, six weeks for lung inflammation, two weeks for blood NAD+.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Walking distance (the ER’s only Medium-tier functional benefit) leads, followed by the two Speculative-tier markers, with the pure target-engagement measure 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 names 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; time_3_sub “Rises then plateaus; no functional outcome has appeared that quickly” reproduces the caveat at ER 415.
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 retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER `Expected Benefits` section	🟢	Every item corresponds to an ER `Expected Benefits` sub-heading (ER 159–205).
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 534, 535, 541 and 547.
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.	🟢	Items are bare heading phrases; the ER’s magnitudes (+17.6 metres, 1.34 percentage points, 22/51/142%) and trial descriptions are all omitted.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses appear in any benefits item; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” flag on Body Composition is also dropped.
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” (ER 155) and the QRS sets `benefits_high` to `style="display: none"` with no empty-state text (line 534).

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER `Potential Risks & Side Effects` section	🟢	Every item corresponds to an ER `Potential Risks & Side Effects` sub-heading (ER 231–279).
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 598, 601, 607 and 614, each 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.	🟢	Items are bare heading phrases; the ER’s magnitudes (1.66 µmol/L, effect size 0.27, 95% CIs, P values) and study descriptions are all omitted.
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 item; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” flags on homocysteine and cerebral blood flow 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	All four risk tiers carry items in the ER, so no sub-section needed hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	The table reproduces the ER `Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success` biomarker table (ER 445–454), with the “Why Measure It?” column carried into “Why”.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All eight ER biomarkers appear with their optimal ranges intact: whole-blood NAD, homocysteine 5–8 µmol/L, hs-CRP below 1.0 mg/L, ALT below 25/20 U/L, HbA1c 4.8–5.4%, fasting glucose 75–90 mg/dL, blood pressure below 120/80 mmHg, PSA below 1.0/2.0 ng/mL.
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: baseline, 8–12 weeks, 6 months, then 6–12 months, plus monthly blood pressure and the 4-week recheck after escalation above 1000 mg — all from ER 443.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	The five items come from the ER’s “Qualitative markers worth recording alongside the laboratory panel” list (ER 456–462).
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All five listed: walking capacity, perceived daytime energy, sleep quality and dream vividness, cognitive clarity and word-finding, recovery from hard exercise.

Issues 25/08/2026 08:53

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.