Audit: QRS - sh-Polypeptide-1 for Hair Regrowth

Audit conducted on 27/09/2026 01:44 using AI4L / Opus 5.5

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 94
Passed 85
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. 🟢 All protocol values (3,500 IU, 1 mL, 16 weeks, 6 months, 3 sessions 1 month apart), time points, tiers, gates, markers and cadence trace to ER Therapeutic Protocol, Practical Considerations, Key Interactions & Contraindications and Monitoring sections.
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. 🟢 “Whether a plain leave-on serum works is unshown” and “potentiating in theory” carried verbatim.
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”). 🟢 Monitor/Caution classes and tier placements match the ER.
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 “Populations who should avoid”; interactions from the drug/supplement lists; no modifying factors relabeled.
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, citations, NCT IDs, expert or brand names in the QRS.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 None introduced.

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-qualified tone mirrors the ER.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢  
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢  
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 Protocols presented as studied regimens.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢  
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person address.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Technical terms expanded (bFGF, PRP, INR, FGFR, TSH, trichoscopy).
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢  
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢  
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. 🟢  
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. 🟢 Clinic procedures (needling, PRP) presented as protocols.
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. 🟢  
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. 🟢 Lede distinguishes procedure-delivered add-on use from plain serums.
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. 🟢 No “anti-aging” wording.
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. 🟢 “injection”, “injected into the skin”, “microneedling” used; no lay route 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 labels present unchanged (lines 440, 477, 519, 539, 553, 575, 594, 598–600, 680).
3.2 All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 All template spans present; marker_# and qualitative_item_# expanded to 6 and 5 instances.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 website spans (evidence_review, audit, full_review) unchanged.

4. Formatting

# Description Result Comments
4.1 When the source ER section is empty, the QRS uses the ER’s own empty-state phrasing verbatim. Typical phrasings are “None documented in human trials to date” and “Not formally studied” N/A No ER source section feeding the QRS is empty; the empty Risk High tier is governed by 13.5 (hidden span).
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 use the ER bold label text (institution parentheticals condensed); gate items use ER labels.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢  
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji.
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. 🟢 Items condensed; content volume consistent with one 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.
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. 🟢 Lines 3 and 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. 🟢  
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: "00:01" quoted (contains colon).
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢  
5.6 Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]” 🟢 26.9.25 matches QRS.md.
5.7 Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430) 🟢 2026-0927-0133.
5.8 The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]” 🟢  
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.
5.10 The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]” 🟢  
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 5.5.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢  
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. 🟢  

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.
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.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 09/27/2026.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 Opus 5.5.
6.5 No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker. 🟢  

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] opens by saying what the intervention is — its kind (e.g., dietary supplement, prescription medication, peptide, plant, procedure, practice) — and what it is used for, in plain language, before any verdict on the evidence 🟢 Opens “a cosmetic ingredient, a lab-made copy of a human skin-repair protein, sold in scalp serums and clinic treatments for thinning hair”.
7.2 [at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section 🟢  
7.3 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 70 words 🟢 62 words.
7.4 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Motivation line 37; Conclusion lines 384–390.
7.5 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 No acronyms.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢  
7.7 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢  

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢  
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 All 7 “Populations who should avoid” items present.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢  
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. 🟢  
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). 🟢 5-year window, 50,000/µL and INR 3.0 thresholds, needling/injection scope qualifiers preserved.
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 No ranking notation in the ER contraindications.
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. 🟢 Section populated; ER names populations to avoid.
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 Section not empty.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢  
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 10 interactions present; FGFR inhibitors excluded as already covered by the active-cancer-treatment contraindication.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢  
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. 🟢  
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). 🟢 Example drug lists preserved.
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 No ranking notation in the ER interactions.
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. 🟢 Section 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 Section not empty.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 ER Therapeutic Protocol lines 296–298.
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Microneedle, topical and PRP protocols (the RCT-backed regimens).
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 ER provides more than three aspects.
10.4 All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section. 🟢  

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 🟢 16 weeks, 6 months, 12 months (ER line 332).
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Hair density (High) before graft survival (Medium).
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 aspects available.
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢  
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 ER provides time-to-effect information.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢  
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢  
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. 🟢 ER headings used; flags (Not Central, Conflicted) stripped.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢  
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.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢  
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢  
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. 🟢  
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢  
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. 🟢 risks_high span hidden with display: none (line 577); ER states no risk reaches High.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢  
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All 6 ER table biomarkers listed with ER targets.
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. 🟢 Matches ER line 351.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢  
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All 5 ER qualitative markers listed verbatim.

Issues 27/09/2026 01:44

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 27/09/2026 01:42

  1. 2.7 — Unexplained specialist terms: “trichoscopy” (lines 606, 617, 674) is never glossed although the ER defines it as “magnified scalp imaging”, and “IU” in action_2_value (line 458) is not expanded although the ER writes “international units (IU)”.

Fixes 27/09/2026 01:42

  1. 2.7 — Unexplained specialist terms: Glossed the first use of trichoscopy in marker_1_name (“Hair density (trichoscopy)” to “Hair density (trichoscopy, magnified scalp imaging)”), using the ER’s own definition. Expanded “IU” in action_2_value to “international units (IU)”.

Issues 27/09/2026 01:40

  1. 2.7 — Unexpanded acronyms and jargon: “bFGF” is used in all three Protocol cells (lines 447, 458, 466, 472) without expansion or any link to sh-Polypeptide-1; “PRP” (lines 466, 472, 494) is unexpanded until the Key Interactions gate (line 565); “FGFR” (line 543), “INR” (line 547) and “TSH” (line 639) are also unexpanded.

Fixes 27/09/2026 01:40

  1. 2.7 — Unexpanded acronyms and jargon: Expanded “bFGF” at first use in action_1_value to “basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF)”; rewrote action_3_sub to “Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) enriched with bFGF, …”; expanded “FGFR inhibitors” to “fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors”, added the ER gloss “(a clotting-time measure)” after “INR”, and expanded marker_4_name to “TSH (thyroid-stimulating hormone)”.

Issues 27/09/2026 01:37

  1. 2.15 — Lay route-of-administration phrasing: At a Glance (line 433) says “delivered with fine needles or injections” — lay phrasing for the route of administration instead of the formal “microneedling or injection”.
  2. 8.4 — Trailing rationale in contraindication: Line 544 “Pregnancy and breastfeeding (no safety data)” keeps an explanatory parenthetical that is not a threshold, time window, or severity qualifier.

Fixes 27/09/2026 01:37

  1. 2.15 — Lay route-of-administration phrasing: Changed the At a Glance wording from “delivered with fine needles or injections” to “delivered by microneedling or injection”.
  2. 8.4 — Trailing rationale in contraindication: Removed the “(no safety data)” parenthetical, so the item now reads “Pregnancy and breastfeeding”.