{
  "schema_version": "chamgap-public-evidence-check-1.0",
  "public_id": "v2924-s0",
  "verdict_number": "2924",
  "title": "High-ferritin-target intravenous iron × Hemoglobin-centred response in nondialysis CKD anemia",
  "view_version": "1.0",
  "view_created_date": "2026-10-10",
  "criteria_version": "1.0",
  "criteria_date": "2026-10-06",
  "review_date": null,
  "legacy_evidence_date": "2026-08-26",
  "review_scope": {
    "materials_read": "Existing review summaries and stored records of methodological application",
    "clinical_papers_directly_read": false,
    "new_clinical_search": false,
    "limitation": "Only the stored summary was read for production; external material was not accessed. Partial verification in this presentation does not mean clinical confirmation or completed review. Absent subclaim scores, status and axes are not filled with parent values. Some clinical observations are retained without establishing direct reductions, harmlessness or equivalence.",
    "date_meaning": "This is the date the stored materials were checked, not the date of a new search of the clinical literature."
  },
  "claim_context": {
    "population": "Hemoglobin response in iron-deficiency anemia with nondialysis chronic kidney disease",
    "intervention": "High-ferritin-target intravenous ferric carboxymaltose",
    "dose": "The ferritin 400~600 µg/L target and oral iron 100 mg twice daily are retained only as historical research conditions. Actual intravenous doses, frequency and achieved values are unverified; no dose conversions or use guidance are created.",
    "comparator": "Oral ferrous sulfate active control. Details of the other group in the three-arm design are unverified in the current summary.",
    "endpoint": "Initiation of other anemia management or consecutive Hb <10 g/dL during weeks 8~52; separate Hb ≥1 g/dL response",
    "duration": "56-week design; the primary composite Hb criterion concerns weeks 8~52. Exact analysis origins, follow-up and censoring for each clinical event are unverified.",
    "excluded_extensions": [
      "Extending surrogate outcomes to dialysis, survival or cardiovascular protection",
      "Generalizing to all iron formulations, ferritin targets, dialysis states or long-term safety",
      "Administration, treatment-target, dialysis or treatment-suitability recommendations",
      "Adding the same report, trial, population, two sheets or events as independent replication"
    ]
  },
  "requirements": [
    {
      "item_id": "N01",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Which existing subclaim and question direction does this sheet preserve?",
      "needed": "Material retaining the selected subclaim-parent relationship, original question and verdict record.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Which existing subclaim and question direction does this sheet preserve? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "Which existing subclaim and question direction does this sheet preserve? Distinguish Material retaining the selected subclaim-parent relationship, original question and verdict record in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "When additional material becomes available, the existing question scope is recorded separately from other questions.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The selected stored summary concerns hemoglobin-centred response; the selected question and existing verdict record are distinguished. Parent hemoglobin-verdict and other-subclaim context is retained. No new question, split or verdict is created.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Material retaining the selected subclaim-parent relationship, original question and verdict record is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Material retaining the selected subclaim-parent relationship, original question and verdict record.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Material retaining the selected subclaim-parent relationship, original question and verdict record."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N02",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How are subclaim grade/note and absent score, status and axes distinguished?",
      "needed": "Actual selected-subclaim fields and separately retained parent fields.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How are subclaim grade/note and absent score, status and axes distinguished? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "How are subclaim grade/note and absent score, status and axes distinguished? Distinguish Actual selected-subclaim fields and separately retained parent fields in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "If the original subclaim is corrected, the complete pre-change text and change event are preserved.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The selected subclaim grade is C and its note says the surrogate composite improved. Subclaim score, status and axes are absent from the stored summary, recorded as null and field absence. Parent C, 50 points and axes are not substituted for subclaim values.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Actual selected-subclaim fields and separately retained parent fields is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Actual selected-subclaim fields and separately retained parent fields.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Actual selected-subclaim fields and separately retained parent fields."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N03",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What historical context do parent C, 50 points, axes, safety and empty values represent?",
      "needed": "Complete parent verdict, axes, safety labels and actual change history.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What historical context do parent C, 50 points, axes, safety and empty values represent? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Parent scores/axes are historical context and do not fill absent selected-subclaim values.",
      "criterion": "What historical context do parent C, 50 points, axes, safety and empty values represent? Distinguish Complete parent verdict, axes, safety labels and actual change history in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Even if a new verdict is requested, original grades and production status remain separately preserved.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Parent C, 50 points and B/S/R1/I0/E+/B2 are preserved. Precision is unrecorded; coprimary splitting, large hard-endpoint RCT and no-human-study flags are false; grade-override reasons are empty in both languages. Parent safety is caution. These values are not inherited as selected-subclaim scores or newly satisfied conditions.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Complete parent verdict, axes, safety labels and actual change history is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Complete parent verdict, axes, safety labels and actual change history.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Complete parent verdict, axes, safety labels and actual change history."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N04",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How are original Korean/English, reference dates and correction histories retained?",
      "needed": "Complete original text, language-specific explanations, reference dates and additional correction records.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How are original Korean/English, reference dates and correction histories retained? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Historical cross-check and research-assessment wording does not mean newly completed review.",
      "criterion": "How are original Korean/English, reference dates and correction histories retained? Distinguish Complete original text, language-specific explanations, reference dates and additional correction records in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added language-specific text or corrections preserve the complete existing version and link as a new event.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Parent and subclaim explanations in Korean/English are linked as originally written. The original reference date is 2026-08-26; corrections are an empty array and deliberation an empty value. Detailed Korean rates and concise English wording do not overwrite each other.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Complete original text, language-specific explanations, reference dates and additional correction records is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Complete original text, language-specific explanations, reference dates and additional correction records.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Complete original text, language-specific explanations, reference dates and additional correction records."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N05",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Which materials were actually read for this production and which external materials remain unread?",
      "needed": "Acquisition/reading levels and relevant result locations in original source material.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Which materials were actually read for this production and which external materials remain unread? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "URLs link sources without being upgraded to reading, link testing or content verification.",
      "criterion": "Which materials were actually read for this production and which external materials remain unread? Distinguish Acquisition/reading levels and relevant result locations in original source material in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Separate additional reading must record its scope and time as a new event.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The actual production input is the complete stored summary. Abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols, SAPs and original result tables were not accessed. Research-assessment wording in the summary does not mean current external reading.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Acquisition/reading levels and relevant result locations in original source material is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Acquisition/reading levels and relevant result locations in original source material.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Acquisition/reading levels and relevant result locations in original source material."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N06",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What are the FIND-CKD report bibliography and registration identity?",
      "needed": "Paper bibliography, original full text, registration content and their actual links.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What are the FIND-CKD report bibliography and registration identity? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "A registration identifier does not verify registration content or certify a unique trial.",
      "criterion": "What are the FIND-CKD report bibliography and registration identity? Distinguish Paper bibliography, original full text, registration content and their actual links in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added report identities must be distinguished as the same trial or separate trials using original material.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The stored direct report is Macdougall IC et al., 2014 FIND-CKD, linked to PMID 24891437 and NCT00994318. DOI, PMCID and external registration content are unverified.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Paper bibliography, original full text, registration content and their actual links is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Paper bibliography, original full text, registration content and their actual links.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Paper bibliography, original full text, registration content and their actual links."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N07",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How do two subclaim sheets share one trial, report and population?",
      "needed": "Original material distinguishing trial, report, population, group, outcome links and overlap.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How do two subclaim sheets share one trial, report and population? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "New-unit increment remains 0 and the final independent count remains null.",
      "criterion": "How do two subclaim sheets share one trial, report and population? Distinguish Original material distinguishing trial, report, population, group, outcome links and overlap in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "New follow-up/related reports link to the existing family; independent replication requires separate material.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The hemoglobin-response and clinical-event sheets share the same FIND-CKD report/population. Hemoglobin, dialysis, death, infection or two sheets are not added as independent trials/participants. One stored bibliographic entry does not certify a unique trial count.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Original material distinguishing trial, report, population, group, outcome links and overlap is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original material distinguishing trial, report, population, group, outcome links and overlap.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original material distinguishing trial, report, population, group, outcome links and overlap."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N08",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Which nondialysis chronic kidney disease anemia population was studied?",
      "needed": "Nondialysis iron-deficiency anemia eligibility, recruitment and exclusion criteria.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Which nondialysis chronic kidney disease anemia population was studied? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Eligibility thresholds or disease stages absent from the current summary are not invented.",
      "criterion": "Which nondialysis chronic kidney disease anemia population was studied? Distinguish Nondialysis iron-deficiency anemia eligibility, recruitment and exclusion criteria in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Population differences require direct comparison material for the relevant populations.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The parent question concerns iron-deficiency anemia in nondialysis chronic kidney disease. Results are not automatically transferred to dialysis patients, other anemia causes or preoperative preparation.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Nondialysis iron-deficiency anemia eligibility, recruitment and exclusion criteria is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Nondialysis iron-deficiency anemia eligibility, recruitment and exclusion criteria.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Nondialysis iron-deficiency anemia eligibility, recruitment and exclusion criteria."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N09",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How much is verified about baseline risk and representativeness?",
      "needed": "Group baseline tables, recruitment pathways, exclusions, severity and comorbidities.",
      "role": "Supplementary; required for general application",
      "role_reason": "How much is verified about baseline risk and representativeness? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "How much is verified about baseline risk and representativeness? Distinguish Group baseline tables, recruitment pathways, exclusions, severity and comorbidities in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Application to different risk populations must be distinguished using direct studies with follow-up.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Detailed age, kidney-disease stage, baseline Hb/iron status, comorbidities and group distributions of clinical-event risk are absent from the current summary. A population name does not establish identical responses in all nondialysis patients.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Group baseline tables, recruitment pathways, exclusions, severity and comorbidities is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Group baseline tables, recruitment pathways, exclusions, severity and comorbidities.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Group baseline tables, recruitment pathways, exclusions, severity and comorbidities."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N10",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What are the research conditions for high-ferritin-target intravenous ferric carboxymaltose?",
      "needed": "Intervention strategy, product identity, target-adjustment rules and group achieved values.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What are the research conditions for high-ferritin-target intravenous ferric carboxymaltose? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Historical targets are not written as treatment, dose or suitability guidance.",
      "criterion": "What are the research conditions for high-ferritin-target intravenous ferric carboxymaltose? Distinguish Intervention strategy, product identity, target-adjustment rules and group achieved values in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Differences by formulation or target require direct strategy-comparison material.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The historical high-group ferritin target is 400~600 µg/L. It is a trial strategy condition, not an achieved value or a recommended target. It is not extended to other iron formulations/targets.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Intervention strategy, product identity, target-adjustment rules and group achieved values is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Intervention strategy, product identity, target-adjustment rules and group achieved values.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Intervention strategy, product identity, target-adjustment rules and group achieved values."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N11",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What is the original research exposure of the oral ferrous sulfate control?",
      "needed": "Oral formulation, research exposure, actual use, discontinuation and adherence material.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What is the original research exposure of the oral ferrous sulfate control? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Only original exposure values are retained; no new totals, conversions or use recommendations are calculated.",
      "criterion": "What is the original research exposure of the oral ferrous sulfate control? Distinguish Oral formulation, research exposure, actual use, discontinuation and adherence material in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Material with different control conditions is linked separately with those differences specified.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The original oral control provided 100 mg iron as ferrous sulfate twice daily. This compares an active control with the intravenous-iron strategy; no dosing guidance or dose conversion is created.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Oral formulation, research exposure, actual use, discontinuation and adherence material is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Oral formulation, research exposure, actual use, discontinuation and adherence material.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Oral formulation, research exposure, actual use, discontinuation and adherence material."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N12",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How are the selected comparison and other-group information separated in the three-arm design?",
      "needed": "Actual three-group allocation, exposure, analysis/control tables and selected-comparison plans.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How are the selected comparison and other-group information separated in the three-arm design? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Other-group targets, denominators or effects are not inferred or back-calculated from totals.",
      "criterion": "How are the selected comparison and other-group information separated in the three-arm design? Distinguish Actual three-group allocation, exposure, analysis/control tables and selected-comparison plans in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added other-group results retain separate attribution from the current comparison.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "FIND-CKD is a 56-week multicentre randomized open-label three-arm active-control trial. The selected stored comparison is high-ferritin-target intravenous iron versus oral iron; specific targets, group values and exposure of the other intravenous-iron group are absent from the summary.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Actual three-group allocation, exposure, analysis/control tables and selected-comparison plans is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Actual three-group allocation, exposure, analysis/control tables and selected-comparison plans.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Actual three-group allocation, exposure, analysis/control tables and selected-comparison plans."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N13",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How much is known about actual intravenous administration, achieved ferritin, adherence and changes?",
      "needed": "Actual group administration, achieved values, adherence, changes and discontinuation records.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How much is known about actual intravenous administration, achieved ferritin, adherence and changes? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "No new administered doses, schedules or unit conversions are created.",
      "criterion": "How much is known about actual intravenous administration, achieved ferritin, adherence and changes? Distinguish Actual group administration, achieved values, adherence, changes and discontinuation records in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Exposure differences require material linking actual strategy implementation with outcomes.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Intravenous formulation and target strategy are described, but actual doses/frequency, group cumulative exposure, achieved ferritin, oral adherence and changes are unverified in the current summary.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Actual group administration, achieved values, adherence, changes and discontinuation records is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Actual group administration, achieved values, adherence, changes and discontinuation records.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Actual group administration, achieved values, adherence, changes and discontinuation records."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N14",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Are starting ESA, transfusions or other iron concurrent care or outcome components?",
      "needed": "Additional-management initiation criteria, group use/timing and outcome-counting rules.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Are starting ESA, transfusions or other iron concurrent care or outcome components? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Treatment switches are not presented as the same outcome as patient events.",
      "criterion": "Are starting ESA, transfusions or other iron concurrent care or outcome components? Distinguish Additional-management initiation criteria, group use/timing and outcome-counting rules in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Interpreting additional management requires plans alongside actual courses.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Clinician decisions to start ESA, transfusions or other iron entered the primary composite. Actual treatment frequency, criteria and group courses are absent from the summary, requiring concurrent-management and composite-component roles to be distinguished.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Additional-management initiation criteria, group use/timing and outcome-counting rules is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Additional-management initiation criteria, group use/timing and outcome-counting rules.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Additional-management initiation criteria, group use/timing and outcome-counting rules."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N15",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Are 56-week follow-up and the weeks 8~52 composite window the same period?",
      "needed": "Original plans/tables for outcome-specific origins, measurement intervals, analysis windows, end and follow-up.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Are 56-week follow-up and the weeks 8~52 composite window the same period? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "Are 56-week follow-up and the weeks 8~52 composite window the same period? Distinguish Original plans/tables for outcome-specific origins, measurement intervals, analysis windows, end and follow-up in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added timepoint-specific material links each outcome to its relevant period separately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The overall design is 56 weeks; the primary composite Hb window is weeks 8~52. Overall follow-up and outcome-specific counting windows are not merged.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Original plans/tables for outcome-specific origins, measurement intervals, analysis windows, end and follow-up is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original plans/tables for outcome-specific origins, measurement intervals, analysis windows, end and follow-up.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original plans/tables for outcome-specific origins, measurement intervals, analysis windows, end and follow-up."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N16",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What are the randomized, ITT and completed denominators?",
      "needed": "Overall/group flowcharts, analysis-population definitions and exclusion/follow-up-discontinuation reasons.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What are the randomized, ITT and completed denominators? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "No new differences, proportions or participant totals are created from current numbers.",
      "criterion": "What are the randomized, ITT and completed denominators? Distinguish Overall/group flowcharts, analysis-population definitions and exclusion/follow-up-discontinuation reasons in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added actual analysis inclusion/missingness rules supplement outcome-specific links.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Stored counts of 626 randomized, 613 ITT and 519 completed are distinguished. The stored summary says 519/626 (82.9%) completed and 17.1% did not complete. These denominators are not applied uniformly to all outcomes and exclusions are not newly calculated.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Overall/group flowcharts, analysis-population definitions and exclusion/follow-up-discontinuation reasons is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Overall/group flowcharts, analysis-population definitions and exclusion/follow-up-discontinuation reasons.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Overall/group flowcharts, analysis-population definitions and exclusion/follow-up-discontinuation reasons."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N17",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How are group-denominator differences for the primary composite, death and infection recorded?",
      "needed": "Outcome-specific group, analysis-population, follow-up, missingness and event-counting tables.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How are group-denominator differences for the primary composite, death and infection recorded? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "One denominator is not used to recalculate other outcomes or certify common ITT.",
      "criterion": "How are group-denominator differences for the primary composite, death and infection recorded? Distinguish Outcome-specific group, analysis-population, follow-up, missingness and event-counting tables in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Original explanations of outcome-specific denominators link only to the corresponding rows.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Primary-composite denominators are high-target 153 and oral 308; original death/infection denominators are 154 and 312. These differ; exact analysis-population definitions and exclusion reasons remain externally unread.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Outcome-specific group, analysis-population, follow-up, missingness and event-counting tables is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Outcome-specific group, analysis-population, follow-up, missingness and event-counting tables.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Outcome-specific group, analysis-population, follow-up, missingness and event-counting tables."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N18",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What effects remain uncertain from noncompletion and missingness?",
      "needed": "Group missingness reasons, follow-up retrieval, analysis handling and sensitivity material.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What effects remain uncertain from noncompletion and missingness? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Attrition effects, new bias grades or lost-person counts are not calculated.",
      "criterion": "What effects remain uncertain from noncompletion and missingness? Distinguish Group missingness reasons, follow-up retrieval, analysis handling and sensitivity material in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Changes under missingness assumptions must be distinguished using original analyses/additional material.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The stored assessment retains historical limitations of 17.1% noncompletion and substantial attrition. Group reasons, outcome-specific missingness, imputation and sensitivity analyses cannot be verified from the summary alone. The historical ≥15% category is not run as a new automatic scoring rule.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Group missingness reasons, follow-up retrieval, analysis handling and sensitivity material is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Group missingness reasons, follow-up retrieval, analysis handling and sensitivity material.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Group missingness reasons, follow-up retrieval, analysis handling and sensitivity material."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N19",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What is the verification scope of central randomization?",
      "needed": "Detailed allocation methods, protocols and implementation material.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What is the verification scope of central randomization? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Central-allocation wording alone does not certify all randomization procedures as appropriate.",
      "criterion": "What is the verification scope of central randomization? Distinguish Detailed allocation methods, protocols and implementation material in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added allocation procedures must retain known levels separately from unverified details.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The stored account says central interactive voice-response randomization was used. Actual sequence generation, concealment, stratification and implementation details remain externally unread.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Detailed allocation methods, protocols and implementation material is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Detailed allocation methods, protocols and implementation material.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Detailed allocation methods, protocols and implementation material."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N20",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What distinctions does open-label design require for treatment decisions and laboratory measurement?",
      "needed": "Laboratory/assessor masking, treatment-decision criteria, adjudication and control-group operations.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What distinctions does open-label design require for treatment decisions and laboratory measurement? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "The original three-defect, avoidability and common bias-category wording remains historical only.",
      "criterion": "What distinctions does open-label design require for treatment decisions and laboratory measurement? Distinguish Laboratory/assessor masking, treatment-decision criteria, adjudication and control-group operations in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Material separating component measurement from decision procedures is needed.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The original limitation of open-label design and clinician additional-treatment decisions in the primary composite is retained. Laboratory measurement, assessor masking and consistent decision criteria are unverified in detail. No new claim that all Hb tests are inherently subjective is made.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Laboratory/assessor masking, treatment-decision criteria, adjudication and control-group operations is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Laboratory/assessor masking, treatment-decision criteria, adjudication and control-group operations.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Laboratory/assessor masking, treatment-decision criteria, adjudication and control-group operations."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N21",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Was NCT00994318 registration content actually verified?",
      "needed": "Original registration text, versions, endpoints, analyses and changes.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Was NCT00994318 registration content actually verified? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "A registration number is not displayed as actual reading or trial certification.",
      "criterion": "Was NCT00994318 registration content actually verified? Distinguish Original registration text, versions, endpoints, analyses and changes in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Separately acquired registration material must retain its version and relationship to reports.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "NCT00994318 is retained as the existing registration identifier. Registration was not opened here; initial registration date, prespecified endpoints, amendments, posted results and paper comparisons remain unverified.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Original registration text, versions, endpoints, analyses and changes is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original registration text, versions, endpoints, analyses and changes.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original registration text, versions, endpoints, analyses and changes."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N22",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "At what level are primary/secondary endpoint and analysis hierarchies known?",
      "needed": "Prespecified plans, hierarchy, hypotheses, multiple comparisons, analysis versions and original tables.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "At what level are primary/secondary endpoint and analysis hierarchies known? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Parent primary-endpoint wording is not upgraded to direct external-plan verification.",
      "criterion": "At what level are primary/secondary endpoint and analysis hierarchies known? Distinguish Prespecified plans, hierarchy, hypotheses, multiple comparisons, analysis versions and original tables in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added plans link prespecified and post hoc distinctions to each outcome.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The parent explanation distinguishes the other-anemia-management/consecutive-low-Hb composite as the exact primary endpoint. Prespecified plans, multiplicity and analysis hierarchy for Hb rise and clinical/safety events remain unread in registration, protocols and SAPs.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Prespecified plans, hierarchy, hypotheses, multiple comparisons, analysis versions and original tables is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Prespecified plans, hierarchy, hypotheses, multiple comparisons, analysis versions and original tables.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Prespecified plans, hierarchy, hypotheses, multiple comparisons, analysis versions and original tables."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N23",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What original information describes Vifor Pharma sponsorship and oral-iron supply?",
      "needed": "Original disclosures of sponsorship, product supply, design, data management, analysis and publication roles.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What original information describes Vifor Pharma sponsorship and oral-iron supply? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "What original information describes Vifor Pharma sponsorship and oral-iron supply? Distinguish Original disclosures of sponsorship, product supply, design, data management, analysis and publication roles in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added sponsorship, data-access or analysis-involvement information is recorded separately from interpretation limits.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Stored material specifies Vifor Pharma sponsorship and oral-iron supply. Parent manufacturer-single-trial assessment remains historical. Sponsorship alone does not trigger a new verdict invalidating results.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Original disclosures of sponsorship, product supply, design, data management, analysis and publication roles is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original disclosures of sponsorship, product supply, design, data management, analysis and publication roles.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original disclosures of sponsorship, product supply, design, data management, analysis and publication roles."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N24",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What are the detailed author conflicts, data-access and publication roles?",
      "needed": "COI, sponsorship contracts, analysis, data-access and publication-role disclosures.",
      "role": "Supplementary; required for independence claims",
      "role_reason": "What are the detailed author conflicts, data-access and publication roles? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "What are the detailed author conflicts, data-access and publication roles? Distinguish COI, sponsorship contracts, analysis, data-access and publication-role disclosures in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added independent reports first distinguish actual parties, data sharing and analysis relationships.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Beyond summarized sponsorship/product supply, detailed author conflicts, contracts, data-access/analysis independence and publication decisions are unverified. Unverified information is not changed to absence of conflicts.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. COI, sponsorship contracts, analysis, data-access and publication-role disclosures is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; COI, sponsorship contracts, analysis, data-access and publication-role disclosures.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "COI, sponsorship contracts, analysis, data-access and publication-role disclosures."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N25",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What safety scope do stored infection observations cover?",
      "needed": "Infection definitions, collection periods, group analysis populations, severity, effects/CIs and planned power.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What safety scope do stored infection observations cover? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "No differences, ratios, P values or CIs beyond original values are calculated.",
      "criterion": "What safety scope do stored infection observations cover? Distinguish Infection definitions, collection periods, group analysis populations, severity, effects/CIs and planned power in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Clinically important infection harms require appropriate event collection, follow-up and comparisons.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Infections were high-target 51/154 (33.1%) versus oral 95/312 (30.4%). Historical wording describing similar infection events is retained alongside inadequate safety power. No absence of increased risk is established.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Infection definitions, collection periods, group analysis populations, severity, effects/CIs and planned power is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Infection definitions, collection periods, group analysis populations, severity, effects/CIs and planned power.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Infection definitions, collection periods, group analysis populations, severity, effects/CIs and planned power."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N26",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Are detailed safety collection, sparse events and attrition verified?",
      "needed": "Original safety tables, collection rules, missingness, discontinuation reasons and event-specific denominators/follow-up.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Are detailed safety collection, sparse events and attrition verified? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "Are detailed safety collection, sparse events and attrition verified? Distinguish Original safety tables, collection rules, missingness, discontinuation reasons and event-specific denominators/follow-up in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Safety signals require material with definitions, ascertainment, denominators and follow-up.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Some infection, death and dialysis values exist, but detailed collection methods, recurrent-event handling, assessors, period-specific missingness, severity and original safety tables are unverified. No attempted access is not changed to nonreporting or inaccessibility.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Original safety tables, collection rules, missingness, discontinuation reasons and event-specific denominators/follow-up is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original safety tables, collection rules, missingness, discontinuation reasons and event-specific denominators/follow-up.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original safety tables, collection rules, missingness, discontinuation reasons and event-specific denominators/follow-up."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N27",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What harm-evidence gaps concern long-term outcomes, vulnerable populations and alternative factors?",
      "needed": "Material linking long-term follow-up, vulnerable populations, baseline risk, concurrent care, discontinuation and events.",
      "role": "Supplementary; required for long-term/safety extension",
      "role_reason": "What harm-evidence gaps concern long-term outcomes, vulnerable populations and alternative factors? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "What harm-evidence gaps concern long-term outcomes, vulnerable populations and alternative factors? Distinguish Material linking long-term follow-up, vulnerable populations, baseline risk, concurrent care, discontinuation and events in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Long-term/rare clinical harms need separate material with sufficient follow-up and appropriate comparisons.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Results in the selected 56-week population are not extended to long-term/rare harms or safety in other kidney-disease states. Detailed links among baseline disease, concurrent care, treatment selection and events are absent, so sole causation or harmlessness cannot be established.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Material linking long-term follow-up, vulnerable populations, baseline risk, concurrent care, discontinuation and events is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Material linking long-term follow-up, vulnerable populations, baseline risk, concurrent care, discontinuation and events.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Material linking long-term follow-up, vulnerable populations, baseline risk, concurrent care, discontinuation and events."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N28",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Is preoperative verdict 2560 for the same drug direct evidence here?",
      "needed": "Direct material and application limits for different use settings, populations, timepoints and clinical outcomes.",
      "role": "Supplementary; required for limits of extension to other settings",
      "role_reason": "Is preoperative verdict 2560 for the same drug direct evidence here? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Another verdict grade is not inherited by this subclaim.",
      "criterion": "Is preoperative verdict 2560 for the same drug direct evidence here? Distinguish Direct material and application limits for different use settings, populations, timepoints and clinical outcomes in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Material from other settings is not merged by drug name alone; question/population differences remain recorded.",
      "current_reports": [],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Existing citation 2560 concerns preoperative intravenous ferric carboxymaltose and transfusion/death in a different setting, linked as historical D, 34 points. It is not added as direct nondialysis chronic-anemia evidence or a new independent trial entry. That page remains unread.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Direct material and application limits for different use settings, populations, timepoints and clinical outcomes is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Direct material and application limits for different use settings, populations, timepoints and clinical outcomes.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Direct material and application limits for different use settings, populations, timepoints and clinical outcomes."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N29",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What is the exact primary composite for hemoglobin-centred response?",
      "needed": "Exact composite plans, components, event-counting and first-event rules.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What is the exact primary composite for hemoglobin-centred response? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "What is the exact primary composite for hemoglobin-centred response? Distinguish Exact composite plans, components, event-counting and first-event rules in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Original material separating composite definitions from component-specific effects is needed.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The stored primary endpoint is initiation of other anemia management or consecutive Hb <10 g/dL during weeks 8~52, rather than simply Hb-rise response. The subclaim title and actual composite definition remain side by side.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Exact composite plans, components, event-counting and first-event rules is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Exact composite plans, components, event-counting and first-event rules.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Exact composite plans, components, event-counting and first-event rules."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N30",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What are the primary-composite group events, denominators, HR and CI?",
      "needed": "Original composite tables, analysis populations, time models, CIs and covariate handling.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What are the primary-composite group events, denominators, HR and CI? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Current values are not copied to other clinical endpoints or groups.",
      "criterion": "What are the primary-composite group events, denominators, HR and CI? Distinguish Original composite tables, analysis populations, time models, CIs and covariate handling in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Material with different estimands or analysis populations is shown separately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The primary composite is stored as high-target 36/153 (23.5%) versus oral 98/308 (31.8%), HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.44~0.95). These are between-group composite values, not dialysis, mortality or cardiovascular HRs.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Original composite tables, analysis populations, time models, CIs and covariate handling is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original composite tables, analysis populations, time models, CIs and covariate handling.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original composite tables, analysis populations, time models, CIs and covariate handling."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N31",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How do the directions of composite HR 0.65 and Hb-rise HR 2.04 differ?",
      "needed": "Event definitions, origins, models, denominators and interpretation targets for each HR.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How do the directions of composite HR 0.65 and Hb-rise HR 2.04 differ? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "HRs are not converted into RRs, response rates or new relative percentage changes.",
      "criterion": "How do the directions of composite HR 0.65 and Hb-rise HR 2.04 differ? Distinguish Event definitions, origins, models, denominators and interpretation targets for each HR in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added analysis definitions link each outcome to its estimand separately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The original composite concerns reduced additional-treatment/consecutive-low-Hb events, with HR 0.65. Hb ≥1 g/dL rise is a separate outcome with HR 2.04. HRs for different event definitions/directions are not changed into the same response rate or clinical efficacy.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Event definitions, origins, models, denominators and interpretation targets for each HR is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Event definitions, origins, models, denominators and interpretation targets for each HR.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Event definitions, origins, models, denominators and interpretation targets for each HR."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N32",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What original scope do the absolute difference and NNT concern?",
      "needed": "Original estimation timepoints, populations, analyses and intervals for absolute effects/NNT.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What original scope do the absolute difference and NNT concern? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "No new NNTs, CIs or illustrative patient counts are calculated.",
      "criterion": "What original scope do the absolute difference and NNT concern? Distinguish Original estimation timepoints, populations, analyses and intervals for absolute effects/NNT in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added original explanations supplement the application scope of existing values.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The stored composite absolute difference is -8.3%p and NNT is 12. These remain within the original composite/comparison/period context without new calculations; they are not displayed as survival/dialysis-benefit counts.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Original estimation timepoints, populations, analyses and intervals for absolute effects/NNT is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original estimation timepoints, populations, analyses and intervals for absolute effects/NNT.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original estimation timepoints, populations, analyses and intervals for absolute effects/NNT."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N33",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What are the count, measurement window and test conditions for consecutive Hb <10 g/dL?",
      "needed": "Consecutive-measurement plans, intervals, laboratory standardization and event handling under missingness.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What are the count, measurement window and test conditions for consecutive Hb <10 g/dL? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Test schedules or consecutive values outside the original text are not invented.",
      "criterion": "What are the count, measurement window and test conditions for consecutive Hb <10 g/dL? Distinguish Consecutive-measurement plans, intervals, laboratory standardization and event handling under missingness in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added measurement plans link the actual rules for two consecutive values.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Korean consecutive Hb <10 g/dL wording and English two consecutive Hb values below 10 g/dL are preserved. The window is weeks 8~52 and < is not changed to another inequality. Actual test intervals, specimens, equipment and confirmation rules are unverified.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Consecutive-measurement plans, intervals, laboratory standardization and event handling under missingness is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Consecutive-measurement plans, intervals, laboratory standardization and event handling under missingness.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Consecutive-measurement plans, intervals, laboratory standardization and event handling under missingness."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N34",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How was the additional-treatment-initiation component measured and decided?",
      "needed": "Component-specific initiation criteria, adjudication, group events, denominators and effects.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How was the additional-treatment-initiation component measured and decided? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "How was the additional-treatment-initiation component measured and decided? Distinguish Component-specific initiation criteria, adjudication, group events, denominators and effects in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Composite contents require material presenting treatment decisions and repeated-Hb criteria separately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The original limitation is that clinician decisions to start ESA, transfusions or other iron entered the open-label composite. Group initiation criteria, frequencies, first-event timing and component effects are unverified.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Component-specific initiation criteria, adjudication, group events, denominators and effects is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Component-specific initiation criteria, adjudication, group events, denominators and effects.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Component-specific initiation criteria, adjudication, group events, denominators and effects."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N35",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What are the reported Hb ≥1 g/dL rise-response values?",
      "needed": "Original tables of Hb-response event definitions, origins, denominators, analyses and CIs.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What are the reported Hb ≥1 g/dL rise-response values? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "What are the reported Hb ≥1 g/dL rise-response values? Distinguish Original tables of Hb-response event definitions, origins, denominators, analyses and CIs in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Hb-rise details must link separately from the composite.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Hb ≥1 g/dL response HR is 2.04 (95% CI 1.52~2.72). It is retained as the original laboratory-response outcome; this HR is not direct dialysis/survival benefit.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Original tables of Hb-response event definitions, origins, denominators, analyses and CIs is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original tables of Hb-response event definitions, origins, denominators, analyses and CIs.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original tables of Hb-response event definitions, origins, denominators, analyses and CIs."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N36",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Are absolute Hb change, group responder counts and durability verified?",
      "needed": "Original Hb responders, mean changes, timepoints, denominators, missingness and durability material.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Are absolute Hb change, group responder counts and durability verified? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "Are absolute Hb change, group responder counts and durability verified? Distinguish Original Hb responders, mean changes, timepoints, denominators, missingness and durability material in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Response magnitude and durability require direct detailed laboratory-outcome material.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Beyond the Hb ≥1 g/dL response HR, group responder counts/rates/denominators, mean Hb changes, unit-specific estimates, durability and detailed timepoints are absent from the summary. These are not filled from composite event counts.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Original Hb responders, mean changes, timepoints, denominators, missingness and durability material is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original Hb responders, mean changes, timepoints, denominators, missingness and durability material.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original Hb responders, mean changes, timepoints, denominators, missingness and durability material."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N37",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Do baseline Hb/iron status and achieved ferritin link to outcomes?",
      "needed": "Original baseline/repeated Hb, ferritin and iron-status tables linked to exposure.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Do baseline Hb/iron status and achieved ferritin link to outcomes? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "Do baseline Hb/iron status and achieved ferritin link to outcomes? Distinguish Original baseline/repeated Hb, ferritin and iron-status tables linked to exposure in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Material presenting targets separately from achieved values is needed.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The target ferritin range is described, but group baseline Hb/iron status, achieved values, distributions and changes are unverified in the summary. Targets are not changed into actual measurements.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Original baseline/repeated Hb, ferritin and iron-status tables linked to exposure is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Original baseline/repeated Hb, ferritin and iron-status tables linked to exposure.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original baseline/repeated Hb, ferritin and iron-status tables linked to exposure."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N38",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "How much is known about composite components and group contributions?",
      "needed": "Component events, denominators, overlap, time, effects and planned comparisons.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "How much is known about composite components and group contributions? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "How much is known about composite components and group contributions? Distinguish Component events, denominators, overlap, time, effects and planned comparisons in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Material showing the composite alongside each component is needed.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Overall composite events are retained, but additional-treatment-type events, contributions of consecutive-low-Hb, overlap, first events and recurrent-event counting are unverified in detail. Composite reduction is not extended to improvement in every component.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Component events, denominators, overlap, time, effects and planned comparisons is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Component events, denominators, overlap, time, effects and planned comparisons.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Component events, denominators, overlap, time, effects and planned comparisons."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N39",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Do hemoglobin outcomes answer symptoms, quality of life or sustained patient benefit?",
      "needed": "Direct patient-reported outcomes, function, quality-of-life and long-term follow-up definitions/comparisons.",
      "role": "Supplementary; required for extension to patient benefit",
      "role_reason": "Do hemoglobin outcomes answer symptoms, quality of life or sustained patient benefit? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "Do hemoglobin outcomes answer symptoms, quality of life or sustained patient benefit? Distinguish Direct patient-reported outcomes, function, quality-of-life and long-term follow-up definitions/comparisons in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Patient-important outcomes must link the question and evidence using separate direct material.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Original material describes improved laboratory/treatment-decision surrogates. Direct symptom, quality-of-life or sustained post-follow-up benefits are absent from the summary and are not replaced by Hb response.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Direct patient-reported outcomes, function, quality-of-life and long-term follow-up definitions/comparisons is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Direct patient-reported outcomes, function, quality-of-life and long-term follow-up definitions/comparisons.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Direct patient-reported outcomes, function, quality-of-life and long-term follow-up definitions/comparisons."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N40",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Do current dialysis observations clinically validate Hb response?",
      "needed": "Group dialysis events, definitions, at-risk populations, denominators, follow-up, effects and power.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Do current dialysis observations clinically validate Hb response? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "The overall 16 people are not copied as events in each of two groups.",
      "criterion": "Do current dialysis observations clinically validate Hb response? Distinguish Group dialysis events, definitions, at-risk populations, denominators, follow-up, effects and power in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Dialysis benefit requires direct comparisons designed to answer that clinical event adequately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Original wording reports 16 people overall (2.6%) starting dialysis over 56 weeks with no group difference. Group events, denominators, effects and CIs are unverified; insufficient power limits interpretation, so Hb response is not translated into reduced dialysis.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Group dialysis events, definitions, at-risk populations, denominators, follow-up, effects and power is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Group dialysis events, definitions, at-risk populations, denominators, follow-up, effects and power.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Group dialysis events, definitions, at-risk populations, denominators, follow-up, effects and power."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N41",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Do current mortality observations establish survival benefit?",
      "needed": "Death counting, causes, analysis populations, follow-up, between-group estimation and precision material.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Do current mortality observations establish survival benefit? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "No new mortality differences, risk ratios, P values or CIs are calculated.",
      "criterion": "Do current mortality observations establish survival benefit? Distinguish Death counting, causes, analysis populations, follow-up, between-group estimation and precision material in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Survival benefit needs sufficient follow-up and comparison material directly addressing death.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Deaths are retained as high-target 7/154 (4.5%) versus oral 15/312 (4.8%). Detailed death definitions, between-group estimates, CIs and power are absent; Hb improvement does not establish increased survival.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Death counting, causes, analysis populations, follow-up, between-group estimation and precision material is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Death counting, causes, analysis populations, follow-up, between-group estimation and precision material.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Death counting, causes, analysis populations, follow-up, between-group estimation and precision material."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N42",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What direct cardiovascular-event reduction material is unverified?",
      "needed": "Cardiovascular outcome plans, definitions, group events, effects, CIs and follow-up.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What direct cardiovascular-event reduction material is unverified? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "What direct cardiovascular-event reduction material is unverified? Distinguish Cardiovascular outcome plans, definitions, group events, effects, CIs and follow-up in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Cardiovascular benefits require material powered directly for those outcomes.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The parent and clinical-event subclaim say reduced cardiovascular events cannot be concluded and the trial was not designed/powered to answer them. Current cardiovascular definitions, components, counts, denominators and CIs are absent. Absence of information is not changed to zero events or an established null effect.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Cardiovascular outcome plans, definitions, group events, effects, CIs and follow-up is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Cardiovascular outcome plans, definitions, group events, effects, CIs and follow-up.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Cardiovascular outcome plans, definitions, group events, effects, CIs and follow-up."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N43",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What limits extension from hemoglobin-centred response to clinical events?",
      "needed": "Direct surrogate-clinical-outcome relationships and separate outcome material.",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "What limits extension from hemoglobin-centred response to clinical events? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "What limits extension from hemoglobin-centred response to clinical events? Distinguish Direct surrogate-clinical-outcome relationships and separate outcome material in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Extension questions require added material directly measuring/testing patient events.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Subclaim C and the improved-surrogate-composite note are retained. Laboratory/additional-treatment improvement is not extended to separate dialysis, mortality or cardiovascular-protection claims. Positive Hb response remains alongside unverified patient-event benefit.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Direct surrogate-clinical-outcome relationships and separate outcome material is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Direct surrogate-clinical-outcome relationships and separate outcome material.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Direct surrogate-clinical-outcome relationships and separate outcome material."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N44",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "Was the same strategy/outcome replicated in other independent research?",
      "needed": "Bibliographic, registration and population independence with direct same-strategy/outcome comparisons.",
      "role": "Supplementary; required to claim independent replication",
      "role_reason": "Was the same strategy/outcome replicated in other independent research? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "Stored-summary information is distinguished from unread external material; no numbers, effects or verdicts beyond the original text are created.",
      "criterion": "Was the same strategy/outcome replicated in other independent research? Distinguish Bibliographic, registration and population independence with direct same-strategy/outcome comparisons in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added independent results first distinguish trial, report and population sharing.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "The current direct evidence entry is one FIND-CKD report. Independent replication, new material or separate clinical-event trials of the same strategy are unverified within the current original material. Parent R1/I0 history is not changed into new independent-count certification.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Direct details are unverified within the current stored summary and unread external material. Bibliographic, registration and population independence with direct same-strategy/outcome comparisons is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Bibliographic, registration and population independence with direct same-strategy/outcome comparisons.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Bibliographic, registration and population independence with direct same-strategy/outcome comparisons."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N45",
      "question_type": "Evidence condition",
      "question": "What is preserved when formulation, population or duration changes, or material is corrected?",
      "needed": "Complete pre-change original text, new material versions and reasons for question/condition/observation changes.",
      "role": "Required (update boundaries)",
      "role_reason": "What is preserved when formulation, population or duration changes, or material is corrected? This is needed to distinguish the direct scope of this question from other outcomes.",
      "application_exception": "No new searches, calculations, grades or treatment recommendations are run in this production.",
      "criterion": "What is preserved when formulation, population or duration changes, or material is corrected? Distinguish Complete pre-change original text, new material versions and reasons for question/condition/observation changes in original material and retain unverified limits.",
      "basis": "Family condition definitions linked to the stored summary; no official clinical-method assessment is run.",
      "condition_origin": "Application conditions for the current question; review of the existing content is incomplete",
      "proposed_research": "Added material separates condition-version changes from observation application and retains user-review requirements.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Distinguishing stored summary/linking information in current source material from unverified material entries",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials not read",
      "observation": "Current scope is original high-ferritin-target intravenous iron versus oral iron over 56 weeks in nondialysis CKD anemia. Effects across other formulations, targets, populations or timepoints are not merged automatically; new stored summaries/corrections must be recorded as separate events.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Some stored summary content is linked for presentation; external clinical confirmation/content review is not complete. Complete pre-change original text, new material versions and reasons for question/condition/observation changes is needed and remains subject to user review.",
      "missingness": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, plans and original tables remain unread; Complete pre-change original text, new material versions and reasons for question/condition/observation changes.",
      "uncertainty": "Missing information or unread external material does not mean zero effect/events, no paper, access failure or a new grade.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Complete pre-change original text, new material versions and reasons for question/condition/observation changes."
    }
  ],
  "reports": [
    {
      "report_id": "R01",
      "title": "Macdougall IC, Bock AH, Carrera F, et al. FIND-CKD. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2014;29(11):2075-2084. PMID: 24891437.",
      "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24891437/",
      "report_type": "56-week multicentre randomized open-label three-arm active-control trial",
      "existence": "A direct report links to the existing review summary evidence/citation lists",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external papers and registration unread",
      "study_family": "F01",
      "independent_replication": false,
      "observed_result": "23.5% versus 31.8%; HR 0.65 (0.44~0.95), absolute difference -8.3%p, NNT 12",
      "result_level": "Original research-assessment wording in the stored summary",
      "source_evidence_date": "2026-08-26",
      "materials": [
        {
          "material_type": "Stored summary",
          "public_status": "Stored summary",
          "access_status": "Stored summary read for production",
          "acquired": true,
          "actually_read": "Summary read",
          "as_of": "2026-10-06T19:06:10.263703+09:00",
          "qualification": "The complete parent stored summary was read for production; the original paper was not acquired/read."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Paper abstract",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "Only the stored PMID link is connected. Actual abstract content and original numerical locations were not verified."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Full paper",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "The URL is a bibliographic link; full-text acquisition/accessibility was not verified."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Clinical trial registration",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "Only the registration identifier is retained. Registration URL/content, initial/amended versions and prespecified plans are unverified."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Study protocol",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "Original plans for three-group strategies, clinical hypotheses, components, follow-up and additional-treatment rules have not been acquired."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Statistical analysis plan",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "Detailed hierarchy, time models, analysis populations, missingness, clinical-event power and multiplicity plans have not been acquired."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Original results and safety tables",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "Original tables are needed to verify Hb composite/response and dialysis, death, cardiovascular and infection event definitions, denominators, models, follow-up and detailed intervals."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Sponsorship and interest disclosures",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "Beyond summarized sponsorship/oral-iron supply, original author conflicts, data-access, analysis and publication roles have not been acquired."
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Related verdict in a different setting",
          "public_status": "External material unread; needed",
          "access_status": "Access not attempted; not obtained",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": null,
          "qualification": "Historical D, 34-point link for the same drug in another preoperative setting. It is not added as a direct clinical report or independent replication here; the page was not read."
        }
      ],
      "links": [
        {
          "label": "PubMed",
          "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24891437/"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "method_sources": [
    {
      "id": "M03",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-03",
      "section": "§3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.3, MECIR C5/C7/C13",
      "official_principle": "Clearly record the question, eligibility conditions and reasons for changes, and distinguish variations in interventions.",
      "review_level": "Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work."
    },
    {
      "id": "M04",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5.1 (2025), chapter updated 2025-03",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-04",
      "section": "§4.5, §4.6.1–4.6.3, MECIR C42",
      "official_principle": "Distinguish studies from reports and link them; do not omit a study solely because results are unreported.",
      "review_level": "Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work."
    },
    {
      "id": "M08",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-08",
      "section": "§8.1–8.2.3, Table 8.2.a",
      "official_principle": "Define the outcome and effect of interest, then examine randomization, deviations, missing data, measurement and selective reporting.",
      "review_level": "Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work."
    },
    {
      "id": "M15",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-15",
      "section": "§15.2.4, §15.3.1–15.3.3",
      "official_principle": "Distinguish effect estimates, intervals, importance and applicability. Sample size alone does not determine precision.",
      "review_level": "Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work."
    },
    {
      "id": "M19",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-19",
      "section": "§19.1.2, §19.2.1–19.2.4",
      "official_principle": "Harm questions may require different designs, populations and follow-up from efficacy questions. Case reports do not establish incidence rates.",
      "review_level": "Methodological principles stated in existing pilot materials and condition templates were referenced. The methodological text was not reviewed again in this work."
    }
  ],
  "status_dictionary": {
    "Met": "The original content has been reviewed as meeting the conditions. This status is not used in this preparation.",
    "Partly verified": "Some information in the stored summary was linked during preparation; clinical verification or review is not complete.",
    "Unverified": "Required direct values, definitions or materials have not been established within the current storage and reading scope. This does not mean zero effect, no papers or failed access.",
    "Review incomplete": "Awaiting user review, or actual review remains incomplete.",
    "Not reported": "Used only when original materials were actually read and the outcome was judged unreported. Not used for external materials unread in this work.",
    "Inaccessible": "Used only when an actual access attempt has a recorded failure. Not used for access that was not attempted in this work.",
    "Insufficient evidence for the conditions": "Indicates insufficient direct materials for the relevant scope or conditions; it is not a new grade.",
    "Not applicable": "Used when the reason it does not apply to the original question is stated.",
    "Conflicting data": "Retains the scope of conflicting statements in original materials; it is not an arbitrary reassessment."
  },
  "study_overlap": {
    "state": "Unverified",
    "unique_trial_count": null,
    "unique_participant_count": null,
    "reason": "The existing two-sheet structure separates Hb-centred and clinical-event outcomes from the same FIND-CKD PMID 24891437, registration identifier NCT00994318, report and population. It shares 626 randomized, 613 ITT, 519 completed and different outcomes/denominators. Existing citation 2560 concerns the same drug in another preoperative setting and is not added as a new trial/participant total for this direct report."
  },
  "history": [
    {
      "date": "2026-10-10",
      "kind": "Separation of public-facing pages and materials",
      "view_version": "1.0",
      "change": "Public reader pages and material were prepared from the existing 45 items. No new clinical searches, verification-state changes or scoring were performed."
    }
  ],
  "language": "en",
  "translation_date": "2026-10-10"
}