Audit: QRS - PDRN for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 22/09/2026 07:22 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 populated span traces to a specific ER passage: protocol cells to ER lines 341–345, time-to-effect to lines 378/400, benefit and risk tiers to the ER Expected Benefits and Potential Risks & Side Effects headings, gates to lines 291–317, monitoring table to lines 432–442, qualitative items to lines 446–451.
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.	🟢	“absence of long-term safety data” (risks_medium) and “nothing followed beyond about six months” (at_a_glance) mirror the ER’s own hedged wording at lines 243–245 and 481.
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”).	🟢	Contraindications retain avoidance force; “brief knee pain relief” and “rest on thinner evidence” retain the ER’s qualifications rather than upgrading them.
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 only from the ER “Populations who should avoid PDRN” list; interactions only from the ER interaction bullets; no Benefit-Modifying Factors or Risk-Modifying Factors content leaks into the gates or the risk card.
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, author names, NCT identifiers or brand names (Placentex, Plinest, Rejuran, Nucleofill) appear anywhere in the QRS.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	Attributions present in the ER source bullets (e.g. “the regimen used in the randomised trials pooled by Kim et al., 2019”) were stripped, and none were added.

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-weighted register matching the ER; British spellings (“Tumour”, “haemoglobin”, “programme”) carried through consistently.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Tiered benefits and risks, concrete dosing and biomarker targets, no promotional or alarmist framing.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Content is stated descriptively (“Injected into the joint weekly for 3 weeks”), not issued as instruction to a patient.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperative or advisory verbs (“should”, “must”, “recommend”, “advise”, “consider”, “ensure”) appear anywhere in the body.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Cards present factual lists and values; no recommendation framing.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns anywhere in the rendered body.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are limited to those the ER itself uses as section headings and biomarker names; the at-a-glance lede is fully plain-language.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Every item is reduced to the key fact; mechanistic rationale, effect sizes, severity/consequence/mitigation clauses and citations from the ER bullets are all stripped.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed — no direct address anywhere in the QRS.
2.10	The target audience is health- and longevity-oriented adults who are risk-aware, proactive, and actively seeking to optimize health or apply the intervention under review.	🟢	Optimal functional biomarker ranges (hs-CRP below 1.0 mg/L, HbA1c 4.8–5.4%) rather than conventional clinical cut-offs signal the optimizer audience.
2.11	The target audience is willing to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes as well as follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢	Protocol cells present multi-week injection courses and a 9-marker monitoring panel without hedging on 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.	🟢	Assumes access to clinician-administered injectables and specialist testing (transcutaneous oxygen tension, fish-specific IgE).
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 explicitly separates the strongly evidenced clinical indications from the weakly evidenced cosmetic market that drives consumer use.
2.14	The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) are quoted verbatim.	🟢	The string “anti-aging” does not occur; the page 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.	🟢	Route of administration is stated formally on every surface — “injected into tissue needing repair” (lede), “intramuscularly”, “Injected into the joint”, “intradermal injection”. No “shot”, “pill”, “by mouth” or “bad reaction”.

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 match [qrs_template] byte-for-byte (lines 446, 492, 538, 570, 584, 617, 647, 651–653, 783 of the QRS).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All 38 template variable names present; the marker_#_* and qualitative_item_# patterns are correctly expanded to marker_1..9_* and qualitative_item_1..6.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	Every one of the 38 template spans is covered by a checklist item; a structural diff against [qrs_template] shows no changes outside span content 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 source ER section feeding the QRS is empty — all four benefit tiers, all four risk tiers, the contraindication list, the interaction list, 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.	🟢	“Wound and ulcer protocol”, “Intra-articular knee protocol” and “Peritendinous protocol” are the ER’s bold labels verbatim (ER lines 341, 343, 345); monitoring row labels are the ER biomarker-column values verbatim.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Time-to-effect labels (“Wound closure”, “Joint pain relief”, “Visible skin change”) are lifted from the ER’s own phrasing at line 400, where the ER supplies no per-item bold label.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	Zero emoji characters in the file; the ER’s 🟩/🟥/🟨 tier markers were correctly dropped in favour of the template’s CSS palette and bold 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: magnitudes, evidence bases, severity/consequence/mitigation clauses and mechanistic rationale are all stripped; total visible body text is 679 words. No content is carried onto a second page.

---

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 and precedes every other comment and the <html> element.
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 precedes 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.	🟢	Enclosed entirely in an HTML comment; no metadata value is echoed into the body except the intended header variables.
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, correctly, because it contains a colon; all other values are bare and untrimmed of nothing.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: pdrn_2026-0922-0527_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: 26.9.11, matching the version badge at the top of [qrs_prompt].
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: 2026-0922-0701, correct YYYY-MMDD-HHMM form.
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 number, with the context-window qualifier correctly excluded.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: qrs_filename: pdrn_2026-0922-0527_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; git_user and git_issue are bare values requiring no 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: PDRN for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet, matching ER canonical_topic with the ampersand entity-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: PDRN for Health & Longevity.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: 09/22/2026, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of 2026-0922-0701.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: Opus 5, matching the qrs_creator_ai_fullname 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.	🟢	The header contains only the title and the template subline; the ER’s “Also known as” list (ER line 30) is correctly absent.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢	Compresses ER lines 479–481: mechanism, the two strongest indications, the thinner tendon/scar evidence, the weak cosmetic evidence, and the harm profile.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	Exactly 60 words — at the limit, not over it.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each clause maps to a distinct sentence of the ER Conclusion; “nothing followed beyond about six months” additionally matches ER line 244.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms; “PDRN” is rendered as “Purified fragments of genetic material”, A2A signalling as “calm inflammation and encourage new blood vessels”, angiogenesis as “new blood vessels”, diabetic foot ulcers as “stubborn foot ulcers in people with diabetes”.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No author names, years, sample sizes or p-values.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No effect sizes, hazard ratios, confidence intervals or percentages; evidence strength is conveyed qualitatively (“Strongest support”, “thinner evidence”, “the weakest”).

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All seven items come from the “Populations who should avoid PDRN” list at ER lines 311–317.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All seven ER avoidance populations are present, none added and none omitted.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 573–579: seven discrete <li> elements inside the stop_items 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.	🟢	No dash-trailing clauses remain; “— no human safety data exist” (pregnancy) and the adenosine-A2A/VEGF rationale (malignancy) were both correctly 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 5 years)”, “below 50 × 10⁹/L”, “INR above 3.0”, “above 9.0%”, “at any stage” and “in active flare” 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’s contraindication list uses no ranking notation inside parentheses.
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 identifies seven 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 nine items come from the interaction bullets at ER lines 291–307.
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 seven contraindication entries.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 587–607: nine discrete <li> elements inside the caution_items 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.	🟢	Every “Severity:”, “Consequence:” and “Mitigation:” clause is stripped, as are the in-paren glosses “— stimulants that block adenosine receptors” and “— drugs that damp the immune system”. No dashes remain in any item.
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 nine named example lists are retained (e.g. warfarin/apixaban/rivaroxaban/clopidogrel/aspirin), which is what lets a reader tell whether the interaction applies to them.
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 use plain comma-separated example lists, with no ranking notation.
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 nine such interactions 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 the ER Therapeutic Protocol dosing bullets at lines 341, 343 and 345.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	The three routes selected map to the ER’s best-evidenced indications — diabetic foot ulcer and knee osteoarthritis (both graded High) and tendon/ligament pain (Medium) — leaving out only the Low-graded intradermal skin protocol.
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 Therapeutic Protocol section supplies four distinct dosing protocols, so no set goes unused.
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 content: ER bold labels, the dose/route value, and the schedule and pairing detail in the sub-line.

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	🟢	Wound closure, joint pain relief and visible skin change are precisely the three time-to-effect aspects the ER states at line 400.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Correctly reordered away from the ER’s own prose order to benefit magnitude: wound closure (High, first benefit), joint pain relief (High, second benefit), visible skin change (Low).
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 no set goes unused.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine spans populated; the sub-lines add the ER’s duration-of-effect data (“Fades over 2–4 months after a course”, “gains decline over 4–9 months” — ER line 378).
11.5	If the ER does not provide any information on time to effect, the section is removed completely from the Protocol Panel	N/A	The ER provides time-to-effect information at line 400, so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All eight benefit statements are the ER’s own Expected Benefits sub-headings, tier for tier.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 540–563, each matching the ER’s corresponding evidence tier.
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.	🟢	The ER’s “The evidence basis is…” and “Magnitude:” paragraphs (e.g. the 37.3% vs 18.9% healing figures, HR 2.20, SMD −1.43) are all omitted; only the outcome statements remain.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses appear in any benefit item; the ER’s parenthetical glosses (RCT, VAS, SMD, POSAS) are absent.
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 ER benefit tiers contain items, so no span needs hiding.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All seven risk statements are the ER’s own Potential Risks & Side Effects sub-headings, tier for tier.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 619–641, each matching the ER’s corresponding evidence tier.
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.	🟢	The ER’s evidence-basis sentences and “Magnitude:” lines (e.g. RR 2.15, 95% CI 0.17–26.67) are omitted; only the outcome statements remain.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses appear in any risk item; the ER’s glosses such as “(small firm raised spots)” are absent.
13.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	N/A	All four ER risk tiers contain items, so no span needs 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 at lines 432–442.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All nine ER biomarkers present, in ER order, with targets carried verbatim (HbA1c 4.8–5.4%, hs-CRP below 1.0 mg/L, platelets 150–400 × 10⁹/L, INR 0.9–1.1, eGFR above 90, albumin 4.2–5.0 g/dL, urate 3.5–5.5 mg/dL, TcPO₂ above 40 mmHg, fish-specific IgE).
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 774–777 reproduce the ER’s cadence from line 430: reassessment at 4 weeks, end of course, 3 and 6 months, then annual review.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All six items come from the “Qualitative markers worth tracking” list at ER lines 446–451.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative markers present, in ER order, with none added or omitted.

Issues 22/09/2026 07:22

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 22/09/2026 07:14

1. 1.3 — Hedges dropped from lede: [at_a_glance] (lines 437-438) states “Harms are modest and local; nothing followed beyond six months”, strengthening the ER Conclusion (line 481), which reads “Harms appear modest and local” and “nothing has been followed beyond about six months”.

Fixes 22/09/2026 07:14

1. 1.3 — Hedges restored in lede: [at_a_glance] now reads “Harms appear modest and local; nothing followed beyond about six months”, restoring the ER Conclusion’s two hedges (“appear”, “about”); the passage remains within the 60-word limit.

Issues 22/09/2026 07:07

1. 10.2 — Wound protocol omitted from panel: The Protocol panel carries the intradermal skin protocol (lines 450–459), which maps to a Low-graded benefit, but omits the wound and ulcer protocol from ER line 345 — the regimen behind the ER’s strongest evidence (216-patient placebo-controlled diabetic foot ulcer RCT, graded High) and the indication the QRS’s own Time-to-effect row ranks first.

Fixes 22/09/2026 07:07

1. 10.2 — Wound protocol added to panel: Replaced the first Protocol cell’s “Intradermal skin protocol” (Low-graded benefit) with the ER’s “Wound and ulcer protocol” — one ampoule intramuscularly 5 days a week plus one around the ulcer margin twice weekly for 8 weeks alongside standard wound care (ER line 345). The three cells now run wound/ulcer, intra-articular knee, peritendinous, ordered by benefit magnitude and consistent with the Time-to-effect row.