Audit: QRS - Topical Vitamin E for Skin Rejuvenation

Audit conducted on 03/08/2026 03:58 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 91
Passed 83
Failed 0
N/A 8
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 content (protocol, benefits, risks, contraindications, interactions, monitoring) traces to the ER.
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. 🟢 Cautious framing preserved (e.g., “if present, accrue slowly”, “rest mostly on lab findings and personal stories”).
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”). 🟢 No strengthening or softening detected.
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/interactions come from the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section; no cross-category relabeling.
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 citations, NCT IDs, expert names, or brand names.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No new attributions 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. 🟢 Tone mirrors the ER’s measured, evidence-forward framing.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Meets the tone requirement.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Presents evidence rather than directives.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 Statements are informational, not advisory.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 Information-presenting voice throughout.
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 🟢 Plain language used; technical terms condensed.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Compact throughout.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 No direct address.
2.10 The target audience is health- and longevity-oriented adults who are risk-aware, proactive, and actively seeking to optimize health or apply the intervention under review. 🟢 Framing suits the proactive 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. 🟢 Consistent with the intended audience.
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. 🟢 Not written for the general population.
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. 🟢 Weighting reflects the 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. 🟢 No “anti-aging” language used.
2.15 The document’s own voice uses formal clinical and scientific terminology, not colloquial or consumer-grade language (e.g., “oral medication” not “pill(s)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt. 🟢 Formal terminology used throughout.

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 and headings match the template verbatim.
3.2 All “” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 All expected data-qrs-var spans are present.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 Unaddressed spans (e.g., hidden marker_# row) left in template default state.

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” 🟢 No mapped ER section carries empty-state phrasing; the empty High benefit and absent biomarkers are correctly hidden via display:none/hidden row, not filled with placeholder text.
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. 🟢 No card row labels are drawn from ER “Label: content” bullets; protocol/time cells use condensed cell labels per sections 10 & 11.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Fixed labels are verbatim; protocol/time labels are legitimate condensations of ER content.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji indicators present.
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. 🟢 Content is condensed to a single-page budget.

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. 🟢 Metadata comment (lines 2–14) is first 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. 🟢 YAML delimited by — on 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. 🟢 Enclosed in an HTML comment; not rendered.
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. 🟢 Values trimmed; duration quoted because it contains a colon.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 er_filename: topical_vitamin_e_skin_2026-0803-0251_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]” 🟢 qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02 matches the prompt version.
5.7 Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430) 🟢 qrs_creation_date: 2026-0803-0346.
5.8 The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]” 🟢 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) 🟢 Single-word nickname.
5.10 The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]” 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 4.8.
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 4.8” = nickname + version, no qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 qrs_filename: topical_vitamin_e_skin_2026-0803-0251_Opus_QRS.html.
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. 🟢 All values clean and consistent.

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 &) 🟢 “Topical Vitamin E for Skin Rejuvenation - Quick Reference Sheet”; no entities needed.
6.2 [header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., &amp; for &) 🟢 “Topical Vitamin E for Skin Rejuvenation”.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 2026-0803-0346 → 08/03/2026.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 “Opus 4.8”.
6.5 No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker. 🟢 Header contains only date, ER link, AI4L link, and creator model.

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section 🟢 Distills the ER Conclusion (line 362).
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words 🟢 54 words.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Each fact traces to the Conclusion.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 No acronyms; plain language (“fat-soluble antioxidant”, “moisturizing”, “barrier”).
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trials cited.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No statistics cited.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Derived from that section (ER line 270).
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 Matches the ER “Populations who should avoid it” contraindications.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Three <li> items.
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. 🟢 Concise; no trailing dash clauses.
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). 🟢 “(until healed)” 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 The ER contraindications use no ranking notation.
8.7 If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Contraindications are present.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Derived from that section (ER lines 265–269).
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 Retinoids, benzoyl peroxide, exfoliating acids, fragrances/botanicals; beneficial vitamin C/ferulic pairing correctly excluded.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Four <li> items.
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. 🟢 Concise; no trailing dash clauses.
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 parentheticals preserved (“(tretinoin, adapalene, tazarotene)”, “(glycolic, salicylic)”).
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 interactions use no ranking notation.
9.7 If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Key interactions are present.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Derived from the ER Therapeutic Protocol (lines 284–298).
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Concentration, pairing, and timing are the top actionable aspects.
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 Three actionable aspects are present.
10.4 All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section. 🟢 All three cells filled with ER-derived content.

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 🟢 Hydration/softness, post-procedure recovery, rejuvenation.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Ordered Medium (hydration) → Low (post-procedure) → Speculative (rejuvenation).
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 are present.
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢 All three cells filled with ER-derived content.
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.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 Derived from the ER Expected Benefits (lines 153–193).
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 Medium/Low/Speculative populated; High empty per ER (no High benefit).
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. 🟢 Bare benefit labels only.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical content carried through.
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. 🟢 benefits_high has no items and is set display:none.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 Derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects (lines 205–251).
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four tiers populated to match the ER.
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. 🟢 Bare risk labels only.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 Explanatory parentheticals (e.g., “(inflammation of hair follicles)”, “(pore-clogging)”) stripped.
13.5 If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing. N/A All four risk tiers contain items.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Derived from the ER Monitoring Protocol (lines 335–346).
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 The ER states no laboratory biomarker table applies; the marker row is correctly kept empty/hidden.
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. 🟢 Cadence populated: patch-test 48–72h, review 2–4 weeks, reassess every 2–3 months.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Derived from the ER Monitoring qualitative markers (lines 341–346).
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All four qualitative markers listed verbatim.

Issues 03/08/2026 03:58

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 03/08/2026 03:52

  1. 2.15 — Consumer-grade word “cheap”: [at_a_glance] (line 433) uses the consumer-grade term “cheap”; the ER’s own voice uses the formal “inexpensive” (ER Conclusion, line 362).

Fixes 03/08/2026 03:52

  1. 2.15 — Consumer-grade word “cheap”: Replaced “cheap” with “inexpensive” in the At-A-Glance summary (line 433) to match the ER’s formal register.