{
  "schema_version": "chamgap-public-evidence-check-1.0",
  "public_id": "v2964-s0",
  "verdict_number": "2964",
  "title": "WW 52 versus 12 weeks · Weight loss at 12 months — Evidence Check",
  "view_version": "1.0",
  "view_created_date": "2026-10-12",
  "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": "The whole stored parent-verdict summary and selected subclaim were read for production. External papers, abstracts, full texts, registry, protocol, SAP and funding disclosures were not separately read or accessed. Historical review records are not inherited as current clinical verification or a new verdict.",
    "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": "1,267 adults with BMI at least 28 originally allocated in UK primary care; five-year measured/analysis denominators are unverified",
    "intervention": "Allocation to WW program access for 52 weeks; the intervention’s research identity is weekly group meetings",
    "dose": "Research program duration of 52 weeks; actual attendance and post-program exposure details are unread; this is not implementation guidance",
    "comparator": "Active control with access to the same WW program for 12 weeks; brief intervention is a separate third group",
    "endpoint": "Weight at 12 months and adjusted between-group difference, distinguished from within-group changes and the preceding hierarchical comparison",
    "duration": "12 months, 24 months and five years are distinguished; program-access duration differs from assessment timing",
    "excluded_extensions": [
      "No new effects, CIs, calculations, verdicts, independence certification, participant totals, product recommendations or diet/exercise/weight-loss/treatment instructions"
    ]
  },
  "requirements": [
    {
      "item_id": "N01",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What are the original selected question and subclaim verdict?",
      "needed": "Original wording, subclaim grade/note and parent context for weight loss at 12 months",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Original wording, subclaim grade/note and parent context for weight loss at 12 months; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Record the original verdict, this preparation and existing-content review as separate events.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The original subclaim concerns weight loss at 12 months, grade C, with the note that 52 weeks produced 2.14 kg more loss than 12 weeks. The parent has C with 50 points and separate axes.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "The selected record has no score, status or axes. Parent values are not inserted as subclaim scores, and no new verdict is made.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original selected subclaim and parent verdict"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N02",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Does the selected comparison concern durations of the same WW program?",
      "needed": "Actual interventions and comparison questions for 52 weeks, 12 weeks and brief intervention",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Actual interventions and comparison questions for 52 weeks, 12 weeks and brief intervention; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present duration comparison and comparisons with other controls as separate questions.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The parent outcome is greater weight loss at 12 months than the 12-week program. The comparator also received a 12-week referral to the same WW program and was an active control.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "The 52- versus 12-week result is not recast as an effect versus no treatment or an effect of all commercial weight-management programs.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Actual duration-specific referrals, program and brief-intervention specifications"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N03",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Who was recruited, and what is the applicability?",
      "needed": "Primary-care population eligibility, exclusions and baseline characteristics",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Primary-care population eligibility, exclusions and baseline characteristics; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present the recruited population and applicable question scope.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The trial randomized 1,267 adults with BMI at least 28 in UK primary care.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Detailed age, diseases, selection and exclusion criteria are absent from the summary. Findings are not extended to all weights, ages, countries or diseases.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Eligibility, exclusion and baseline-characteristic tables"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N04",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What was the research identity of the 52-week intervention?",
      "needed": "Program, meetings, referral and actual participation/exposure specifications",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Program, meetings, referral and actual participation/exposure specifications; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish the intervention’s research identity from actual participation and exposure.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The original intervention is the commercial WW weight-management program with one group meeting per week for 52 weeks. Its identity as provision of program access is retained.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "No recommended participation, diet or exercise instructions are written. Referral allocation is distinct from actual attendance/program content; details are unread.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Assigned program and attendance/content/exposure materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N05",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the 12-week active control and brief-intervention group kept separate?",
      "needed": "Contents, denominators and effect of interest for each comparison group",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Contents, denominators and effect of interest for each comparison group; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Retain all three groups while displaying the selected two-group effect separately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "Participants were allocated to brief intervention, 211, WW for 12 weeks, 528, or 52 weeks, 528. The 52- versus 12-week comparison concerns durations of the same program.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Brief intervention is not equated with the 12-week control, and effects of the two controls are not combined into the selected effect.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Three-group intervention specifications and analysis comparisons"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N06",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Have allocation, concealment and masking details been read?",
      "needed": "Randomization sequence, concealment and outcome-assessor masking materials",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Randomization sequence, concealment and outcome-assessor masking materials; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish the design label from actual implementation details.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The original evidence describes a three-arm randomized controlled trial. Parent bias B2 is historical verdict information.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Detailed allocation, concealment, weight-assessor masking and implementation records remain externally unread. The design label does not become new methodological certification.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original allocation, concealment and assessor-role materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N07",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are randomized and measured 12-month denominators distinguished?",
      "needed": "Group-specific flow through allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Group-specific flow through allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present allocation, measurement and analysis denominators separately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The preserved summary records 1,267 allocated (211/528/528), with measured 12-month weight for 823/1,267 (65%).",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Group-specific measured/missing denominators are absent from the summary. The 823 are not assigned to a specific program group or described as all analyzed participants.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Group-specific participant flow and measured/analysis-denominator tables"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N08",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are missing measurements and multiple imputation retained in interpretation?",
      "needed": "Group-specific missingness reasons, imputation models/assumptions and sensitivity analysis",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Group-specific missingness reasons, imputation models/assumptions and sensitivity analysis; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present measured information separately from assumption-based analyses.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The original account of 35% missing measured 12-month weight and use of multiple imputation is retained.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Imputation models, missingness assumptions, group-specific attrition and sensitivity analyses are unread. Imputed results do not become actual measurements for everyone.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original imputation methods, missingness reasons and sensitivity-analysis materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N09",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are actual attendance, co-exposure and between-group changes verified?",
      "needed": "Attendance, program use, accompanying management and group-change materials",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Attendance, program use, accompanying management and group-change materials; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish allocation effects from actual participation and accompanying exposure.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The original materials describe referral allocation and the research identity of one group meeting per week.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Attendance, adherence, cross-group use and other weight-management exposure are absent from the summary. The effect is not attributed solely to attendance time.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Duration-specific attendance, co-exposure and change records"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N10",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are weight measurement and timing specified?",
      "needed": "One-year weight measurement procedure, equipment, units and timing",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "One-year weight measurement procedure, equipment, units and timing; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present weight, measurement timing and units together.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The primary endpoint was weight at one year; the evidence records weight at 12 months.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Detailed equipment, standardization, assessors and repeat-measurement handling remain externally unread. Other body measures are not treated as the same endpoint.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "12-month measurement methods and original result tables"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N11",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are within-group changes and adjusted between-group differences separate values?",
      "needed": "Original within-group changes and adjusted between-group estimate",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Original within-group changes and adjusted between-group estimate; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Display within-group changes separately alongside the adjusted between-group effect.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "At 12 months, weight change was -4.75 kg with 12 weeks and -6.76 kg with 52 weeks; the adjusted between-group difference was -2.14 kg.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Changes are not relabeled as final weights. The two changes are not subtracted to create a new effect or reconciled to the adjusted difference.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Within-group changes, adjustment model and estimate tables"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N12",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What are the 12-month between-group effect, interval and test?",
      "needed": "Directly reported difference, CI and P value for selected 52 versus 12 weeks",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Directly reported difference, CI and P value for selected 52 versus 12 weeks; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present directly reported values with precision and applicability limits.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The recorded adjusted between-group difference is -2.14 kg, 95% CI -3.05 to -1.22, P<.0001.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Only the original effect/interval are retained; no new CI, relative weight loss or hypothetical numerical example is created.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original selected-comparison results and analysis model"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N13",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the adjustment model and effect of interest known?",
      "needed": "Covariates, analysis population, imputation and model specifications",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Covariates, analysis population, imputation and model specifications; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish allocation, participation and completer effects from imputed estimates.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The original account explicitly identifies an adjusted difference and multiple imputation for 35% missingness.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Exact covariates, estimand, analysis population and imputation linkage are unread. The estimate is not upgraded to a completer or actual-attendance effect.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original analysis model and effect-of-interest specifications"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N14",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the preceding and selected hierarchical comparisons distinguished?",
      "needed": "Original testing order, plans and results for preceding and subsequent comparisons",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Original testing order, plans and results for preceding and subsequent comparisons; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Link the preceding gatekeeping comparison separately from the selected effect.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The summary reports that both program groups combined were first compared with brief intervention, passing with -2.71 kg, 95% CI -3.86 to -1.55, P<.0001, before comparing 52 with 12 weeks.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "The -2.71 kg estimate is not copied as the selected 52- versus 12-week effect. The original planning document itself is unread.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original hierarchical-testing plans and comparison-specific analyses"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N15",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What is the reading scope for registration and plans?",
      "needed": "Registration identifier/timing, protocol, SAP and change history",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Registration identifier/timing, protocol, SAP and change history; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish the original identifier from actual material reading and prespecification.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The account states registration preceded recruitment; the evidence identifier is ISRCTN82857232.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Registration originals, dates, change history and plans remain unread here. The source field name does not turn ISRCTN into an NCT registration.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "ISRCTN82857232 registration and planning documents"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N16",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are sample-size assumptions distinguished from minimum clinical importance?",
      "needed": "Sample-size assumptions and declared importance criterion",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Sample-size assumptions and declared importance criterion; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present detection assumptions separately from clinical importance.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The summary states that a sample of 1,200 assumed detection of a 1.3 kg difference, which was not a declared minimum clinically important difference.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "The 1.3 kg assumption does not become an MCID, acceptance threshold or individual perceived-benefit threshold. Actual 1,267 allocation is distinguished from sample-size assumptions.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original sample-size assumptions and clinical-importance criteria"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N17",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are 12-month and 24-month effects distinguished?",
      "needed": "Actual comparison, effect, denominator and subsequent exposure by time point",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Actual comparison, effect, denominator and subsequent exposure by time point; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Display one-year and 24-month estimates separately.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The recorded 24-month difference is -1.32 kg, 95% CI -2.46 to -0.18, P=.0231.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "24-month values are not pooled with 12-month repeated measurements to calculate a new effect or counted as independent replication. The 24-month analysis denominator is unverified.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original 24-month results, follow-up, exposure and denominators"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N18",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Does 12-month superiority establish five-year maintenance?",
      "needed": "Direct five-year comparison and uncertainty in the same trial",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Direct five-year comparison and uncertainty in the same trial; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish short-term superiority from the long-term null result.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The original account records a null 52- versus 12-week result at five years: -0.80 kg, 95% CI -2.13 to 0.54.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "12-month significance is not extended to sustained superiority. The five-year point estimate is not replaced with exact zero or equivalence.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original five-year follow-up report and time-specific comparisons"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N19",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are five-year measurements and follow-up denominators separate from 12 months?",
      "needed": "Five-year follow-up, measurements, group denominators, missingness and analysis assumptions",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Five-year follow-up, measurements, group denominators, missingness and analysis assumptions; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Separate actual observed and analysis denominators by time point.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The long-term citation is the WRAP five-year follow-up. Measured 12-month weight in 823 and 35% missingness concern one year.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Five-year measurement, attrition, imputation and group denominators are absent from the summary. The 823, 65% and 35% are not reused as five-year values.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Five-year participant flow, analysis populations and missingness materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N20",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Is weight loss being extended to other clinical outcomes?",
      "needed": "Direct outcomes for weight versus clinical events, function and quality of life",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Direct outcomes for weight versus clinical events, function and quality of life; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish weight change from direct evidence for other outcomes.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The currently preserved evidence has weight at 12 months as its primary endpoint. The long-term citation title mentions effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Weight differences do not fill disease-prevention, mortality, quality-of-life or cost-effectiveness gaps. No such direct results, economic values or decisions are created.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Outcome-specific original clinical, functional and economic materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N21",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the main report, five-year follow-up and sibling sheets kept within the same trial?",
      "needed": "WRAP bibliography, registration, participants and follow-up relationships",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "WRAP bibliography, registration, participants and follow-up relationships; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish report slots from trial and participant units.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The 2017 WRAP main report and 2022 five-year follow-up are identified as reports of the same trial. The two sheets share parent summary 2964 and two subclaim records.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "The two papers, sibling sheets, three groups, time points and registration are not totaled as independent trials/participants. Confirmed independent-trial/participant totals remain unrecorded.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "WRAP main report, registration and follow-up linkage materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N22",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are other independent replications and generalization materials available?",
      "needed": "Actual independent reports for the same comparison, population and duration",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Actual independent reports for the same comparison, population and duration; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish follow-up in the same cohort from other independent replication.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The preserved summary identifies only the WRAP main report and same-trial long-term follow-up. Parent replication R1 is a historical label.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "No new independent-replication count, similar-program equivalence or effect in other service settings is established.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Direct replication and setting-specific applicability materials for the same question"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N23",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are consortium funding, industry funding and program access distinguished?",
      "needed": "Research funding, program support, contracts and sponsor-role disclosures",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Research funding, program support, contracts and sponsor-role disclosures; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Display public, nonprofit and industry funding separately from program support.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "Public/nonprofit consortium funding accompanied WW International industry-partner funding and program access. The UK MRC Industrial Collaboration Award relationship is retained.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Industry support is not removed because public/nonprofit funding was present. Contracts and analysis/writing/publication roles remain externally unread.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Funding, program access and sponsor-role disclosures"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N24",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are WW funding to authors’ institutions and employee authors distinguished?",
      "needed": "Author-specific affiliations, contributions, institutional support and COI disclosures",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Author-specific affiliations, contributions, institutional support and COI disclosures; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish institutional support from employment, analysis and publication roles.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The account states that five authors disclosed WW research funding received by their institutions.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Institutional funding is not relabeled as five company-employee authors. Author names, additional COI and data rights are absent from the summary.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Author/institutional support, contribution and COI specifications"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N25",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are contracted analysis, medical writing, publication fees and program control known?",
      "needed": "Industry-partner/researcher, analysis, writing and publication role disclosures",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Industry-partner/researcher, analysis, writing and publication role disclosures; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present reported support separately from unverified roles.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The summary describes industry funding, program access and funding relationships involving authors’ institutions.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Nonmention of contracted analysis, medical writing, publication fees or data control does not certify all were absent.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Sponsor/author roles and data/publication-rights disclosures"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N26",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "What is the scope of the intervention-related adverse-event account?",
      "needed": "Event definitions, causal classification, collection and group-specific exposure denominators",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Event definitions, causal classification, collection and group-specific exposure denominators; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish all events from intervention-related events.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The summary states that the paper reported no intervention-related adverse events but did not provide a group-specific table of all adverse events.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "The relationship-specific reporting account does not establish zero of all events, complete collection or confirmed safety.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Group-specific all-event, collection, classification and exposure tables"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N27",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "Is equal safety between the two referral durations established?",
      "needed": "Duration-specific harms comparisons, estimates, intervals and denominators",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Duration-specific harms comparisons, estimates, intervals and denominators; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish efficacy superiority from harms comparisons and equivalence.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The preserved safety account states that without an all-event table by group, equal safety between the durations cannot be concluded.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Absent harms CI, events and denominators do not become an equivalence trial or proof of safety.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Duration-specific harms, discontinuation and comparison intervals"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N28",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "Are separate long-term and rare-harm materials required?",
      "needed": "Actual long-term follow-up, discontinuation, exposure and rare-event materials",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Actual long-term follow-up, discontinuation, exposure and rare-event materials; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present long-term weight effects separately from long-term safety information.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "The main-report account describes no intervention-related adverse events and absence of an all-event table; the subsequent bibliography concerns five-year follow-up.",
      "condition_status": "Unverified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "Five-year weight results or parent Good safety do not fill long-term/rare-harm gaps.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Long-term harms, follow-up and exposure-denominator materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N29",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the read summary and unread external materials distinguished?",
      "needed": "Preserved JSON, bibliography links, abstract, full-text, registration and planning status",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Preserved JSON, bibliography links, abstract, full-text, registration and planning status; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Show summary reading separately from material-specific external nonreading",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "What was actually read was the complete preserved parent JSON summary. The main-report PubMed and five-year repository URLs are linked as in the originals.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "External links were not clicked and materials were not newly queried. A URL does not upgrade external reading, original acquisition or content-review status.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original paper, follow-up report, registration, protocol and SAP"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N30",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are original verdict/history and candidate states separate from preparation?",
      "needed": "Korean/English, axes, dates, corrections, selected record link and preparation events",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Korean/English, axes, dates, corrections, selected record link and preparation events; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Record original history, preparation and existing-content review as separate events.",
      "current_reports": [
        "R01",
        "R02"
      ],
      "existence": "Related original wording, bibliography and context are in the preserved review summary; detailed external materials remain unverified",
      "acquired_read": "Summary read; external materials unread",
      "observation": "Korean/English, original axes, 2026-08-26 reference date, empty corrections/deliberation and subclaims are retained in the complete summary. Original candidate pending/eligible states are preserved history.",
      "condition_status": "Partly verified",
      "status_reason": "Preparation displays information, scope and unverified matters in the read preserved materials; this is not completed content review or a new clinical efficacy/harms verdict.",
      "missingness": "The reference date is not used as a current-review date; candidate values do not activate a review gate stopping preparation. Review remains incomplete, no new units are created and confirmed independence totals remain unrecorded.",
      "uncertainty": "External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.",
      "review_date": null,
      "reading_status": "Full text not read · Stored summary read",
      "additional_material": "Original summary, native selection and condition-freeze/application preparation events"
    }
  ],
  "reports": [
    {
      "report_id": "R01",
      "title": "Ahern AL, et al. Extended and standard duration weight-loss programme referrals for adults in primary care (WRAP): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;389:2214-2225. PMID: 28478041.",
      "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28478041/",
      "report_type": "Preserved summary of the original trial-paper bibliography",
      "existence": "Present in the preserved summary’s actual bibliography and outcome account",
      "acquired_read": "Preserved JSON summary read; external reports, registration and plans unread",
      "independent_replication": "Reports linked within the same trial; no new independent replication",
      "observed_result": "52 versus 12 weeks adjusted difference -2.14 kg (95% CI -3.05 to -1.22), P<.0001",
      "result_level": "Adjusted 12-month 52- versus 12-week difference, separated from the preceding comparison, within-group changes and long-term results",
      "source_evidence_date": "2026-08-26",
      "materials": [
        {
          "material_type": "Stored summary",
          "public_status": "Summary read",
          "access_status": "Stored summary read",
          "acquired": true,
          "actually_read": "Summary read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "External abstract",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "External full text",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Original registration",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Protocol/SAP",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        }
      ],
      "links": [
        {
          "label": "PubMed",
          "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28478041/"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "report_id": "R02",
      "title": "Ahern AL, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of referral to a commercial open group behavioural weight management programme in adults with overweight and obesity: 5-year follow-up of WRAP. Lancet Public Health. 2022.",
      "url": "https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/items/2dea5c4c-b430-4ec0-8aa7-1733b508b296",
      "report_type": "Bibliography of the same trial’s long-term follow-up report",
      "existence": "Present in the preserved summary’s actual bibliography and outcome account",
      "acquired_read": "Preserved JSON summary read; external reports, registration and plans unread",
      "independent_replication": "Reports linked within the same trial; no new independent replication",
      "observed_result": "The 24-month difference was -1.32 kg (95% CI -2.46 to -0.18), P=.0231; at five years the difference was null, -0.80 kg (-2.13 to 0.54). Durable superiority was not established.",
      "result_level": "Original 24-month and five-year accounts distinguished by time point; the five-year result is preserved in its existing subclaim note",
      "source_evidence_date": "2026-08-26",
      "materials": [
        {
          "material_type": "Stored summary",
          "public_status": "Summary read",
          "access_status": "Stored summary read",
          "acquired": true,
          "actually_read": "Summary read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "External abstract",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "External full text",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Original registration",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        },
        {
          "material_type": "Protocol/SAP",
          "public_status": "Not read",
          "access_status": "External material unread",
          "acquired": false,
          "actually_read": "Not read",
          "as_of": "2026-08-26",
          "qualification": "Material slots do not certify external acquisition, actual reading, link checking or numbers of independent trials; a repository URL also does not mean an external document was obtained"
        }
      ],
      "links": [
        {
          "label": "Official source",
          "url": "https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/items/2dea5c4c-b430-4ec0-8aa7-1733b508b296"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "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": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "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": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "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": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "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": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "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": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    }
  ],
  "status_dictionary": {
    "Partly verified": "Some information exists in the preserved review summary; detailed original materials remain unverified. This does not certify a passed review or clinical efficacy.",
    "Unverified": "Detailed materials for the selected condition could not be established within the stored scope; this does not mean zero effect, zero studies or safety",
    "Review incomplete": "Review of existing content incomplete",
    "Met": "Use only within the relevant conditions after existing content review; no automatic designation in this preparation",
    "Not reported": "Distinguish only within materials actually read; do not turn unread external materials into unreported findings",
    "Inaccessible": "Not applied during this preparation because actual access was not tested",
    "Not applicable": "Use with a reason for non-applicability based on an explicit question boundary",
    "Conflicting data": "Judge after actual material comparison; review was not performed during this preparation",
    "Insufficient evidence for the conditions": "Do not use as a clinical grade encompassing currently unread materials"
  },
  "study_overlap": {
    "state": "Unverified",
    "unique_trial_count": null,
    "unique_participant_count": null,
    "reason": "The preserved summary links the WRAP main report and five-year follow-up of the same trial; two papers, three groups, time points, sibling sheets and registration do not certify independent replications or participant totals"
  },
  "history": [
    {
      "date": "2026-10-12",
      "kind": "Separation of public-facing pages and materials",
      "view_version": "1.0",
      "change": "The public page and data were prepared from the existing 30 items. No new clinical search, verification-status change or scoring was performed."
    }
  ],
  "language": "en",
  "translation_date": "2026-10-12"
}