Audit: QRS - TUDCA for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 17/09/2026 20:18 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 span traces to ER text: protocol cells to ER 342/350/354, time cells to ER 394, benefit/risk tiers to ER 155–213 / 235–277, gates to ER 293–320, markers to ER table 424–435, cadence to ER 422, qualitative items to ER 439–444.
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.	🟢	“unmeasured”, “rest on animals”, “Single studies suggest” mirror the ER Conclusion’s own hedges (ER 466–470).
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”).	🟢	Pregnancy/breastfeeding remains an absolute contraindication (QRS 574, ER 318); no tier or gate is up- or down-graded.
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.	🟢	Gates draw only from ER Key Interactions & Contraindications; tiers only from Expected Benefits / Potential Risks & Side Effects. No modifying-factor bullet migrated.
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 identifiers, author names or brand names anywhere in the QRS.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions present.

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.	🟢	Same restrained, British-spelling clinical register as the ER.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Tiered evidence framing plus concrete dose, timing and marker targets.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Descriptive throughout (“Trials used…”, “Split dosing is the norm”).
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperatives in the document’s own voice; “Caution” / “Monitor” are the ER’s verbatim interaction labels.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Protocol cells report what trials and practice did, not what the reader should do.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns present.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms retained are the ER’s own verbatim benefit/risk/marker labels required by 4.2/4.3; the lede is plain-language.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Every entry is a single clause; no elaboration in any span.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed by full-text scan for you/your/yourself — none.
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.	🟢	Ten-marker panel, cadence and split-dosing detail presuppose a proactive self-optimiser.
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.	🟢	Multi-dose daily regimen and repeat laboratory panels are presented 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.	🟢	No simplification to a general-population register.
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 lede scopes the reliable effect to “abnormal liver and bile-flow markers” and insulin action “in obesity”, preserving the ER’s headroom caveat (ER 159/167).
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.	🟢	“Longevity” in the title; no occurrence of “anti-aging”.
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.	🟢	No lay route-of-administration or consumer-grade substitutions; “sugar load” and “loose stools” are the ER Conclusion’s own wording (ER 466/470).

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 byte-identical to the template (QRS 446, 491, 533, 566, 581, 602, 626, 630–632, 785).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All 38 template variable names present; marker_#* expanded to 10 rows and qualitative_item# to 6 items.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	Normalised structural diff against the template shows no change outside variable spans; website="evidence_review", website="audit" and website="full_review" spans untouched.

4. Formatting

#	Description	Result	Comments
4.1	When the source ER section is empty, the QRS uses the ER’s own empty-state phrasing verbatim. Typical phrasings are “None documented in human trials to date” and “Not formally studied”	N/A	No source ER section feeding the QRS is empty.
4.2	Where the ER presents a bulleted item as “Label: content”, the QRS uses the ER’s bold label verbatim as the cell or row label.	🟢	Protocol labels (“Standard dose range”, “Single versus split dosing”, “Best time of day”) and all nine interaction labels carry the ER’s bold labels.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	No label rewritten; the only trim is the sulfonylurea gloss, which 9.5 permits while keeping the named example drugs.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	Full-text scan returns zero emoji; ER’s 🟩/🟥/🟨 and ⚠️ markers correctly dropped.
4.5	The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page.	🟢	Every span is reduced to a single clause and the item counts are those mandated by 8.2, 9.2, 12.x, 13.x, 14.2 and 15.2; no section carries expendable text.

---

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, immediately after the doctype.
5.2	Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML.	🟢	Opening “—” at line 3, closing at line 13.
5.3	The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS and is not surfaced by any other element on the sheet.	🟢	Enclosed in an HTML comment; no metadata value repeated in the body.
5.4	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Only duration: "00:03" is quoted, which the embedded colon requires.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: tudca_2026-0917-1846_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: 26.9.11, matching the QRS.md 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: 2026-0917-2016.
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: 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, no version.
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢	Line 8: 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” — context-window qualifier correctly omitted.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9 matches the file on disk exactly.
5.13	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Re-verified across all ten keys, including the appended git fields.

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 &)	🟢	“TUDCA for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet” (QRS 22).
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., & for &)	🟢	“TUDCA for Health & Longevity” (QRS 417).
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	2026-0917-2016 → “09/17/2026” (QRS 421).
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	“Opus 5” (QRS 425).
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 holds only the title and the template subline; no AKA line despite six alternate names in the ER frontmatter.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢	Compresses all four Conclusion paragraphs (ER 466–470) into mechanism, reliable effect, single-study findings, failed claim, animal-only claims and tolerability.
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.	🟢	Each of the six sentences maps to a separate Conclusion passage.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms; “cell self-destruction”, “protein folding”, “bile-flow markers”, “motor neuron disease” are the plain-language forms.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial named or dated.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numbers of any kind.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All eight items come from the “Populations who should avoid TUDCA” list (ER 313–320).
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	Complete one-to-one coverage of the ER’s eight avoid-populations, none added.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Eight <li> elements inside the span (QRS 569–576).
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.	🟢	Trailing rationales stripped (“where dissolution cannot occur”, “given the high-dose harm signal”, “on grounds of absent human safety data”, “for whom no dose has been established”); no dash clauses remain.
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 C”, “above 20 mg/kg daily” and “under 18” all retained; only the lay glosses “(gallstone pain)” and “(the most severe grade of liver failure)” dropped.
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.
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 names eight such populations and the section is correctly populated, not empty.
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 ER’s interaction bullets (ER 293–309).
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	All nine interactions carried; no overlap with the eight contraindications.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine <li> elements inside the span (QRS 584–592).
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.	🟢	Each item is reduced to label plus the ER’s own action word; all mechanism and mitigation sentences stripped.
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 six example-drug lists and both “(over-the-counter)” qualifiers retained; the sulfonylurea parenthesis is trimmed to “(e.g., glipizide, glyburide)”, keeping the named drugs.
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 list uses 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 names nine such interactions and the section is correctly populated, not empty.
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 trace to ER Therapeutic Protocol bullets (ER 342, 350, 354).
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Dose, dose division and timing — the three executable bullets; the remaining ER bullets are indication-specific approaches or dose modifiers.
10.3	If less that three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	The ER supplies three or more actionable aspects and all three sets are used.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section.	🟢	All nine spans populated; e.g. action_1 reproduces the 250–2,000 mg trial span and the 500–1,000 mg common practice from ER 342.

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	🟢	Liver enzymes, insulin sensitivity and the vascular effect — the only three time-to-effect aspects the ER states (ER 394).
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Liver enzymes (High tier) precede insulin sensitivity and the vascular effect (both Medium tier, in the ER’s own order).
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 aspects and all three sets are used.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine spans populated with ER-sourced values (4–8 weeks, four weeks, within hours).
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, so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All nine benefit phrases are the ER’s own H4 headings (ER 157–213).
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated in tier order.
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.	🟢	No magnitudes, confidence intervals or study detail carried over from ER 161/169/175/183/189/195.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses in any benefits span; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” marker on the ALS heading is 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.	N/A	All four tiers carry items in the ER, 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 phrases are the ER’s own H4 headings (ER 237–277).
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated in tier order.
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.	🟢	Discontinuation rates, the 2.3× endpoint risk and the 63%/37% serious-adverse-event split are all omitted.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses in any risks span; “(Itching)” and “⚠️ Conflicted” correctly stripped from the rash/pruritus item.
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 tiers carry items in the ER, so no span needs hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Rows and cadence taken from ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success (ER 418–435).
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All ten biomarker-table rows present in ER order: ALT, AST, ALP, GGT, total bilirubin, fasting insulin, HbA1c, total serum bile acids, hs-CRP, albumin — with the ER’s exact target ranges.
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.	🟢	Reproduces the baseline panel plus 6–8 week, 12 week, 3–6 month and 6–12 month schedule from ER 420/422.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Taken from the ER’s qualitative-markers list (ER 439–444).
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative markers present in ER order, condensed to their key fact.

Issues 17/09/2026 20:18

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.