| 1 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N01 · Evidence conditionWhich existing cream-use-day question and verdict are preserved?Required |
The selected existing subclaim is that reducing bathing to once or twice weekly lowers days of flare-control cream use. Its original wording, C grade, and note that the secondary result was not elevated to symptom benefit are preserved. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. The subclaim has no score/status/axis fields; parent D30 does not fill them. Mean POEM and 3-point responders, both D, are separate results. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Separation of the selected C grade/note from parent D30 and other subclaims |
Update the question, assessment record and assessment context separately. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed. |
| 2 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N02 · Evidence conditionWho were the actual population, recruits, and respondents?Required |
The original scope was a UK-wide online trial of 438 people aged at least 1 year with POEM scores of at least 3. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Age/diagnosis, baseline cream use, recruitment/exclusions, child proxy responses, and the role of cream-use recorders are unverified. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Age at least 1 year, POEM criterion, online recruitment, baseline, and proxy responses |
Record baseline use and representativeness of the selected population within the material scope. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 3 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N03 · Evidence conditionHow did assigned frequency differ from actual exposure?Required |
The comparison of once or twice weekly with at least six times weekly over 4 weeks describes historical study conditions. It does not create instructions on washing frequency or treatment behavior. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Actual bath/shower frequency, duration/temperature, adherence/changes, and additional exposure are unverified. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Once or twice weekly/at least six times weekly, 4 weeks, actual adherence, and changes |
Distinguish material on nominal assignment from actual exposure. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 4 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N04 · Evidence conditionHow did common topical treatment relate to the cream endpoint?Required |
Both arms continued usual moisturizers and topical treatment. Reduced use days are not a result instructing cessation of baseline treatment. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Details of concomitant treatment, cream identity/intensity, additional/rescue prescriptions, and arm-specific changes are unverified. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Moisturizers, usual topical treatment, selected use days, and arm-specific changes |
Distinguish frequency effects from concomitant treatment/treatment behavior. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 5 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N05 · Evidence conditionWhich question did trial design and allocation assess?Required |
The online pragmatic parallel-group randomized superiority trial allocated 438 people as 220/218. POEM was primary and cream-use days secondary. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Allocation conduct, baseline cream balance, concealment, and secondary-testing plans are unverified. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Online parallel groups, superiority, allocation/concealment, and baseline balance |
Separate the overall design from the analysis specification of the selected secondary result. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 6 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N06 · Evidence conditionWhat limits arise from impossible masking and use-day recording?Required |
Participant masking was impossible given assigned frequency; the manuscript did not count it as a separate defect. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Cream-recording methods, self/proxy reports, diaries/recall, assessor/analyst masking, and arm-specific collection differences are unverified. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Recorder, collection method, and participant/assessor/analyst masking |
Record actual limits of treatment behavior and measurement. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 7 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N07 · Evidence conditionWhat unit is a day of flare-control cream use?Required |
The manuscript reports mean days of flare-control cream use per week. This is distinct from amount used, application frequency, potency, or symptom scores. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Medication classification, ingredient/potency, definition of a use day, and averaging/collection periods are unverified. Days are not converted into doses or amounts. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Cream definition, classification of a use day, days per week, and observation period |
Preserve the units and period of the treatment-behavior endpoint. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 8 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N08 · Evidence conditionWhat were the original mean use-day difference and interval?Required |
Original Korean/English values are preserved: mean use was 0.5 days per week lower in the once-or-twice-weekly arm, CI −0.8 to −0.1. The English manuscript describes an adjusted mean. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Arm-specific means/variances, adjustment variables/model, selected-result P value, and analysis denominator are unverified. No new difference/CI/P/total use days are calculated. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Arm correspondence, adjustment, direction, and original CI |
Connect the original difference, direction, and interval with that secondary analysis. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 9 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N09 · Evidence conditionWhat is the level of secondary-result hierarchy and multiplicity?Required |
The manuscript explicitly described cream-use days as secondary, separate from the null primary symptom result. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Prespecified cream definitions/analysis, number of endpoints, multiplicity adjustment, and change history are unverified. The interval alone does not create a new confirmatory grade. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Prespecified secondary definition, testing hypotheses, multiple comparisons, and changes |
Distinguish material on primary/secondary results from selective reporting/plans. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 10 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N10 · Evidence conditionDo fewer use days mean symptom benefit or reduced worsening?Required |
The manuscript did not convert 0.5 fewer days per week into primary symptom benefit. The note for selected C preserves that scope. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Reasons for recorded use-day reduction, individual linkage with symptoms/worsening, and importance thresholds are unverified. Reduced treatment use is not elevated to clinical benefit, safety, or instructions for use. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Behavior endpoint, symptoms, worsening/harms, and interpretation scope |
Record behavior change separately from patient outcomes. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 11 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N11 · Evidence conditionWhat separate results are primary mean POEM and the 2.2-point assumption?Required |
The primary mean POEM difference −0.4 points (95% CI −1.3 to 0.4), P=.30, and exclusion of the assumed 2.2-point sample-size difference are preserved. The 2.2-point value is not a validated minimal clinically important difference. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. These score differences/assumptions are not transferred into effect, importance, or power thresholds for 0.5 use days. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Four-week mean, scale, original CI/P, and power assumption |
Keep continuous symptoms and treatment-use days separate. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 12 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N12 · Evidence conditionAre 3-point responders mixed with reduced cream use?Required |
Week-4 responders 97/169 (57.4%) versus 91/171 (53.2%), adjusted RD 3.5 percentage points (CI −6.6 to 13.6), and RR 1.06 (CI 0.89 to 1.28) are a separate POEM result. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Responder counts, denominators, and RR are not used as counts/denominators/effects for cream users. Individual linkage between the two results is unverified. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Threshold response, counts/denominators, original RD/RR, and use-day differences |
Record the different units/questions of responders and use days. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 13 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N13 · Evidence conditionWhat were the cream-use-day analysis denominator and missingness?Required |
Original values describe 438 people allocated as 220/218 and a primary model of 388 (193/195) with at least one follow-up POEM. |
Currently required information in the stored summary is unverified. Arm-specific cream-use-day analysis/recording denominators, reasons for missingness, and handling are unverified. Primary-model, responder, or safety denominators are not automatically reused. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Allocation, recording, completion, analysis, and weekly/week-4 denominators |
Link recorder/time-specific denominators separately if material is supplied. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 14 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N14 · Evidence conditionWere analysis populations, adjustment, and sensitivity verified for cream?Required |
The manuscript generally states that allocation-based analysis and missing-data sensitivity gave the same conclusion. The English cream result is described as an adjusted mean. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Cream-specific analysis populations/models/sensitivity values and ITT/PP definitions are unverified. General POEM context is not inherited as full confirmation of selected use days. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Effect of interest, ITT/PP, model, and missingness/sensitivity scope |
Distinguish endpoint-specific analysis from the general narrative. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 15 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N15 · Evidence conditionWere registration, plans, and changes actually compared?Required |
ISRCTN12016473 is preserved as originally recorded. The original summary of secondary cream-use days is linked. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Registration, protocol, statistical analysis plan, and change history remain unread; access was not attempted. An identifier does not establish completed comparison of plans/multiplicity. The original content review remains incomplete. |
ISRCTN, prespecified cream definition, primary/secondary plans, and statistical analysis plan |
Separate prespecification, actual reporting, changes, and the level of supplied material. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 16 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N16 · Evidence conditionWhat was declared about NIHR support and noninvolvement?Required |
Original wording gives NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research, NIHR203279, and no role in design, collection, analysis, publication decisions, or writing. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Contracts/items, actual-role comparisons, and additional support are unverified. Declarations/public funding do not certify every aspect of independence. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Funding programme/identifier, roles, and actual verification scope |
Separate support and declared noninvolvement from actual verification level. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 17 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N17 · Evidence conditionWhat is the scope of unreported commercial supply and personal conflicts?Required |
The manuscript preserves unreported product/device/placebo supply and commercial analysis services, E.J.M./AbbVie consultancy fees, and H.C.W./POEM and L.H./K.S.T./RECAP development disclosures. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Absence, influence, amounts, individual employment/patents, and writing/publication support have not been newly verified. Disclosures do not automatically invalidate results or certify independence. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Products/devices/placebos, analysis services, personal consultancy, and scale development |
Separate disclosed items from actual trial/result roles. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 18 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N18 · Evidence conditionIs the pediatric crossover trial direct replication of cream-use days?Required |
Cardona’s original scope was a single-masked pediatric crossover trial allocating 42 people with 40 completers, over 2 weeks, with SCORAD primary. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Results with the same cream-use-day definition/comparison, crossover sequence/washout, and period-specific denominators are unverified. It is not counted as the same direct replication. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Children, crossover, 2 weeks, 42/40 participants, SCORAD, and different protocol |
Separate other populations, protocols, and crossover periods. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 19 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N19 · Evidence conditionTo which comparison does the pediatric soak-and-seal result belong?Required |
Historical pediatric conditions were twice daily for 15–20 minutes with immediate occlusive moisturization versus twice weekly for at most 10 minutes. The 21.2-point greater SCORAD reduction (CI 14.9 to 27.6), P<.0001, belongs to that comparison. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. This different protocol is not reused as an effect on current cream-use-day reduction. No application/bathing implementation instructions or POEM/day conversions are created. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Historical frequency/duration, occlusive moisturization, and SCORAD scope |
Distinguish the earlier opposite-direction symptom result from selected use days. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 20 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N20 · Evidence conditionWhat remains unverified about pediatric identity, years, registration, and funding?Required |
Evidence-list year 2019, citation issue 2020/DOI 2019, registration field “could not confirm,” the historical classification “Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't,” and unestablished supporting institution are preserved. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Publication stage and actual registration/institution/conflicts are unverified. Year differences do not add reports/trials, and “could not confirm” is not a registration identifier. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Evidence-list 2019, citation 2020, original registration wording, and historical abstract support classification |
Separate historical wording from actual material identity. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 21 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N21 · Evidence conditionDoes the 13-study review concern the same secondary use-day result?Required |
Hua’s review synthesized frequency/eczema severity from 13 prospective studies. Its original conclusion was that daily washing was not worse, but few heterogeneous studies left optimal frequency unclear. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. The same cream-use-day analysis, included populations/treatments/protocols, overlap, and effect-specific denominators are unverified. Synthesized severity and use days are not treated as the same. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Included exposures/designs, severity/treatment-behavior endpoints, and heterogeneity |
Separate the background review from the selected secondary behavior question. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 22 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N22 · Evidence conditionWhat are the historical review-year, support, and registration statements?Required |
Evidence-list/manuscript 2020, citation issue 2021/DOI 2020, registration field “not applicable,” and unestablished specific funding are preserved. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Publication-stage differences, support/conflicts, and review plans/registration are unverified in this work. Not applicable or historical public checks are not converted into new verification of registration absence or reading. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Original 2020/citation 2021, unestablished funding, and not applicable |
Distinguish original wording from the identity of newly supplied material. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 23 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N23 · Harm-information gaps supplementing the efficacy tableWhat were the treatment-change-for-worsening and medical-advice results?Supplementary |
Treatment changes 17/165 (10.3%) versus 13/168 (7.7%) and medical advice 20/165 (12.1%) versus 13/170 (7.6%) are separate original results. Both were numerically higher with less-frequent washing. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. They are not substituted as improvement/safety measures for cream-use days. Event definitions, overlap, missingness, and denominator correspondence are unverified; no new incidence or total is calculated. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Safety/behavior events, separate denominators, periods, and separation from cream-use days |
Keep use days, treatment changes for worsening, and medical advice as distinct results. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 24 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N24 · Harm-information gaps supplementing the efficacy tableWhat is the scope of unreported safety CI/P and causality?Supplementary |
The manuscript records that significant worsening cannot be concluded because between-arm CI/P values for the two safety outcomes were not reported. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. The complete external full text was not read in this work. Numerical direction is not converted into significant worsening, causality, or safety confirmation, and no new CI/P is calculated. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Between-arm testing, collection, baseline/concomitant treatment, discontinuation, and relatedness |
Separate actual reporting levels for efficacy/behavior and harms. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 25 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N25 · Evidence conditionHow are the same reports, populations, and related sheets shared?Required |
The existing two selected sheets share the same stored summary, direct trial, and context reports. Pediatric crossover periods, the same 42/40 participants, and the 13-study review are not summed as separate independent totals. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Review inclusion, related/follow-up report identity, and overlap have not been externally compared. Report counts and original R0/I2 do not newly certify independent replication. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Online trial, pediatric crossover, review, and report/replication relationships |
Separate unrecorded unique clinical totals from report/material entries. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 26 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N26 · Harm-information gaps supplementing the efficacy tableIs the selected result extended to optimal frequency, long-term outcomes, or other products?Supplementary |
The manuscript links to bath additives 2887/water softeners 2426 as separate verdicts, not additional trials. Hot/humid environments, high infection risk, and beyond 4 weeks are scopes to which it did not generalize. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Direct material on long-term cream use, other environments/populations, and products was not retrieved in this work. No instructions on washing frequency, reducing/stopping treatment, or implementing treatment are created. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Direct evidence for 4 weeks/population, environments, separate products, and treatment behavior |
Separate other products, environments, and long-term questions from the current secondary result. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |
| 27 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N27 · Evidence conditionWhat history do parent D30, languages, dates, empty values, and corrections represent?Required |
Parent D30, original axis C0, false flags and empty grade-override reasons, the bilingual manuscript, 2026-08-26, the empty correction array and empty deliberation string, historical cross-checks, original wording, and year differences are preserved in the complete stored summary. |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. Parent D/score/axes are not reused as values of selected C. Original wording/typos were not automatically corrected, and no current search, original-language review, or correction check was performed. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Selected C/parent D30, original axes, Korean/English manuscript, and cross-checks/corrections |
Distinguish the original record from production and amendment events. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed. |
| 28 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N28 · Evidence conditionWhat is the reading level of summaries and external papers/plans/disclosures?Required |
The complete stored summary and 3 evidence entries/3 citations were read for production and original source links connected. Summaries are marked “summary read” and external material “unread.” |
Only the corresponding stored-summary information is recorded; detailed original material remains unread and the original content review incomplete. External abstracts/full texts, registration/protocols/statistical analysis plans, and disclosures remain unread; access was not attempted. Historical public checks and link existence are not inherited as acquisition, full-text reading, or review in this work. The original content review remains incomplete. |
Material types, actual acquisition/reading, and original links |
Update material-specific existence, acquisition, actual reading, and access history separately. This is a proposal; no new investigation, calculation, or trial was performed. |