WW 52 versus 12 weeks · Maintained superiority at five years — Evidence Check

Required evidence, verification status and materials actually read
Item	AVerification status	BReading scope	CReview item	DCurrent findings	EWhy unverified	FRequired materials and conditions	GFurther research
1	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N01 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationWhat are the selected long-term question and original subclaim verdict?Required	The selected preserved account concerns maintained superiority at five years, original grade D, with the note that the difference of -0.80 kg and 95% CI -2.13 to 0.54 was a null result. R02	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.	Original wording, grade/note and parent context for maintained superiority at five years	Distinguish the original long-term verdict from the parent one-year verdict.
2	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N02 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationWhat duration and comparison does long-term superiority concern?Required	The five-year result is the WRAP 52- versus 12-week weight difference. Both groups received access to the same active WW program for different durations. R01 R02	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.	Five-year between-group comparison of allocation to program access for 52 versus 12 weeks	Present allocated program-access duration separately from five-year assessment timing.
3	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N03 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationWhich original-trial population does five-year follow-up concern?Required	The original trial enrolled 1,267 adults with BMI at least 28 in UK primary care; the five-year bibliography concerns follow-up of the same WRAP trial. R01 R02	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.	Linkage between original allocation and long-term follow-up eligibility/observed populations	Link the original recruited population with long-term observed/analysis populations.
4	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N04 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre original allocation denominators distinguished from long-term denominators?Required	Original allocation denominators were 211 for brief intervention, 528 for 12 weeks and 528 for 52 weeks. The 823 with measured weight at 12 months concern one year. R02	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.	Group-specific allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis denominators	Separate original allocation, one-year observation and five-year observation denominators.
5	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N05 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre long-term missingness, attrition and imputation assumptions verified?Required	The original materials describe 35% missing measured weight at 12 months and multiple imputation. Long-term bibliography and the five-year effect are present, but five-year missingness details are absent. R02	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.	Five-year follow-up losses, group-specific reasons, models and sensitivity analysis	Present missingness materials and assumptions separately for each time point.
6	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N06 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre the original intervention identity and research exposure retained?Required	The parent intervention is the WW program with one group meeting per week for 52 weeks; the comparator also received access to the same program for 12 weeks. R01 R02	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.	52- and 12-week program, meetings, access and actual-use specifications	Retain the identities of the research exposure and long-term assessment.
7	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N07 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre additional exposure and cross-group program use after the program known?Required	Five-year follow-up assessment is recorded, but participants’ subsequent program use and other weight-management exposure are absent from the summary. R02	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.	Post-program weight management, program use, co-exposure and changes	Distinguish the original period from subsequent exposure.
8	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N08 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre the definition and measurement methods for five-year weight verified?Required	The long-term summary presents the five-year 52- versus 12-week weight difference in kg. R02	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.	Assessment timing, equipment, actual measurement, units and assessors	Present measurement timing, units and methods together.
9	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N09 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationWhat difference and interval were directly reported at five years?Required	The preserved account states a five-year difference of -0.80 kg, 95% CI -2.13 to 0.54, a null result. R02	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.	Selected between-group difference, confidence interval and analysis comparison	Present the original difference/interval together with the absence of test information.
10	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N10 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHas a null result been recast as exact zero or equivalence?Required	The original subclaim and parent counterview state that the five-year difference was null and durable superiority was not established. R02	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.	Superiority question, effect interval, original interpretation and equivalence criteria	Distinguish unestablished superiority from the scope of an equivalence claim.
11	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N11 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre maintained weight loss within each group and between-group superiority the same question?Required	The preserved long-term value is a 52- versus 12-week between-group weight difference. R02	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.	Actual group-specific baseline, change, maintenance and between-group differences	Separate within-group maintenance from relative between-group superiority.
12	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N12 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHave original 12-month results been reused as long-term results?Required	At 12 months, changes were -4.75 kg for 12 weeks and -6.76 kg for 52 weeks; adjusted difference -2.14 kg, 95% CI -3.05 to -1.22, P<.0001. R01 R02	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.	Time-specific separation of one-year and five-year comparisons	Present positive 12-month and null five-year results separately.
13	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N13 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre 24-month and five-year results kept separate?Required	The 24-month difference is described as -1.32 kg, 95% CI -2.46 to -0.18, P=.0231, a different time point from five years. R01 R02	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.	Actual estimates, denominators and analyses for intermediate and long-term comparisons	Present results separately for intermediate and long-term time points.
14	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N14 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre the long-term effect of interest and analysis model known?Required	The preserved counterview and subclaim note contain a five-year between-group difference and CI; details of the long-term model are absent. R02	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.	Adjustment, covariates, analysis population and estimand for the five-year comparison	Distinguish time-specific estimands and missingness assumptions.
15	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N15 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre original allocation and five-year follow-up masking/selection effects distinguished?Required	The original evidence describes a three-arm randomized controlled trial; the five-year citation concerns follow-up of the same trial. R01 R02	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.	Original allocation, follow-up participation, assessor roles and attrition	Present retained original allocation together with limitations of follow-up selection.
16	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N16 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHave the prespecified long-term endpoint plan and hierarchy been read?Required	The original primary endpoint was weight at one year, and prespecified hierarchical testing describes one-year comparisons; the long-term bibliography concerns five-year follow-up. R01 R02	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.	Long-term assessment plan, SAP, plan changes and multiplicity documents	Distinguish the original primary plan from long-term plans/reporting.
17	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N17 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre registration identifiers separated from actual reading of registration/plans?Required	The identifier is ISRCTN82857232, and the original summary states registration preceded recruitment. R01 R02	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.	Actual ISRCTN registration, pre-recruitment plan and long-term update materials	Present the original identifier separately from planning materials for each time point.
18	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N18 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHave sample-size assumptions or important differences become long-term criteria?Required	The original study describes a sample of 1,200 and a 1.3 kg detection assumption, while stating this was not a declared minimum clinically important difference. R02	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.	Original criteria for five-year importance, power and precision	Distinguish one-year detection assumptions from long-term judgment criteria.
19	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N19 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHas long-term weight comparison been extended to clinical, functional or economic outcomes?Required	The follow-up citation title mentions effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, but the preserved result concerns five-year weight comparison. R02	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.	Direct results for weight versus disease, function and economic endpoints	Present weight superiority separately from other direct endpoints.
20	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N20 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHave follow-up reports from the same cohort been counted as independent replication?Required	The 2017 main report and 2022 five-year follow-up concern the same WRAP trial; the original citation flag identifies long-term follow-up of the same trial. R01 R02	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.	Linkage of main report, follow-up, registration and sibling sheets	Separate report slots from independent-trial and participant units.
21	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N21 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationIs there evidence for other independent long-term replication or other programs?Required	The current preserved summary identifies the main and long-term reports of the same WRAP trial. R01 R02	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.	Independent long-term follow-up of the same question and direct setting-specific comparisons	Distinguish follow-up in the same cohort from gaps in independent long-term replication.
22	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N22 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre original-trial industry, public and nonprofit support all retained?Required	Public/nonprofit joint funding, Weight Watchers International industry-partner funding and program-access provision are all recorded. R01 R02	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.	Funding, program-access support and industry-partner relationships	Distinguish original-trial support from follow-up-report support.
23	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N23 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHas research funding received by authors’ institutions become company-employee authorship?Required	The preserved account states that institutions of five authors disclosed receipt of WW research funding. R01 R02	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.	Institutional support, employment, author contributions and conflicts of interest	Separate institutional support from employment relationships and individual roles.
24	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N24 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre analysis, medical writing, publication fees and data/publication control known?Required	The summary provides mixed funding, program access and institutional-support relationships; the complete long-term analysis/writing/publication roles are absent. R02	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.	Original/follow-up sponsor and author role disclosures	Record reported support separately from unverified roles.
25	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N25 · Supplementary harm evidenceHas the main report’s intervention-related adverse-event account become five-year harms evidence?Supplementary	The safety summary states that no intervention-related adverse events were reported, while an all-event table by group was absent. R01 R02	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.	Long-term event collection, definitions, group denominators and causal classification	Separate the main-report safety statement from long-term harms materials.
26	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N26 · Supplementary harm evidenceDoes a null five-year result also establish equal safety between durations?Supplementary	The original advertising interpretation and safety explanation explicitly limit extension to long-term maintenance or equal safety. R02	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.	Direct long-term harms comparisons, denominators, intervals and plans	Separate the weight-superiority question from safety comparison.
27	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N27 · Supplementary harm evidenceIs the observation scope sufficient to judge long-term and rare harms?Supplementary	Long-term bibliography is present, but safety details in the preserved summary are limited. Parent Good safety is an original-verdict record. R02	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.	Materials on long-term exposure, attrition, rare events and vulnerable populations	Present long-term weight observation separately from rare-harm gaps.
28	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N28 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationHas the current five-year follow-up full text actually been read?Required	What was actually read was the complete parent preserved summary. The five-year citation’s Cambridge repository URL and main-report PubMed URL are linked as preserved. R01 R02	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.	Access distinctions between preserved summary, follow-up repository, abstracts, full texts, registration and plans	Display summary reading separately from external nonreading.
29	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N29 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre reference dates, corrections, Korean/English and axes distinct from the selected long-term verdict?Required	The complete summary retains parent Korean/English, axes, 2026-08-26 reference date, empty corrections/deliberation and the long-term subclaim. R01 R02	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.	Complete original parent and original long-term subclaim	Distinguish parent history, long-term subclaim and preparation date.
30	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N30 · Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparationAre candidate states and the existing selected unit distinct from preparation/content review?Required	The selected existing subclaim is prepared while distinguishing question and verdict-record links. Candidate pending, eligibility and independence labels are retained as original-selection history. R01 R02	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.	Question/record links, historical candidate values and condition-freeze/application events	Display saved preparation separately from user content review and clinical certification.

No items match your search or filter.

30 itemsWhat the statuses mean

Assessment scope

Stored-material review date: Not recorded
Original evidence cut-off: 2026-08-26
Scope actually checked: Existing review summaries and stored records of methodological application. Full papers, supplements, registrations, plans and original data were not read.
What the dates mean: This is the date the stored materials were checked, not the date of a new search of the clinical literature.
Population: 1,267 adults with BMI at least 28 originally allocated in UK primary care; five-year measured/analysis denominators are unverified
Ingredient, formulation and route: 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
Measured outcome: Five-year 52- versus 12-week between-group weight difference, distinguished from within-group maintained loss, final weight and other clinical outcomes
Duration: 12 months, 24 months and five years are distinguished; program-access duration differs from assessment timing
Questions outside this scope: No new effects, CIs, calculations, verdicts, independence certification, participant totals, product recommendations or diet/exercise/weight-loss/treatment instructions

Evidence and sources

The links below lead to the sources. A link alone does not mean the original source was read or its latest publication status verified.

R01 · 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.

PubMed

Material type: Preserved summary of the original trial-paper bibliography
Materials actually read: Preserved JSON summary read; external reports, registration and plans unread
Findings recorded in the stored summary: 52 versus 12 weeks adjusted difference -2.14 kg (95% CI -3.05 to -1.22), P<.0001
Record level: Adjusted 12-month 52- versus 12-week difference, separated from the preceding comparison, within-group changes and long-term results
Study overlap and independent replication: 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

Public availability, access and reading status by material
Material	Public availability	Access status	Actually read	Notes
Stored summary	Summary read	Stored summary read	Summary read	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
External abstract	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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
External full text	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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
Original registration	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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
Protocol/SAP	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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

R02 · 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.

Official source

Material type: Bibliography of the same trial’s long-term follow-up report
Materials actually read: Preserved JSON summary read; external reports, registration and plans unread
Findings recorded in the stored summary: 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.
Record level: Original 24-month and five-year accounts distinguished by time point; the five-year result is preserved in its existing subclaim note
Study overlap and independent replication: 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

Public availability, access and reading status by material
Material	Public availability	Access status	Actually read	Notes
Stored summary	Summary read	Stored summary read	Summary read	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
External abstract	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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
External full text	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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
Original registration	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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
Protocol/SAP	Not read	External material unread	Not read	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

Report counts versus independent study counts

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

Review criteria

Version 1.0 · Criteria record date 2026-10-06. These are Chamgap's own application conditions, informed by the referenced methods. They do not constitute official assessment-tool certification or a new efficacy score.

N01 · What are the selected long-term question and original subclaim verdict?

Required materials and conditions: Original wording, grade/note and parent context for maintained superiority at five years
Conditions for verification: Original wording, grade/note and parent context for maintained superiority at five years; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N02 · What duration and comparison does long-term superiority concern?

Required materials and conditions: Five-year between-group comparison of allocation to program access for 52 versus 12 weeks
Conditions for verification: Five-year between-group comparison of allocation to program access for 52 versus 12 weeks; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N03 · Which original-trial population does five-year follow-up concern?

Required materials and conditions: Linkage between original allocation and long-term follow-up eligibility/observed populations
Conditions for verification: Linkage between original allocation and long-term follow-up eligibility/observed populations; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N04 · Are original allocation denominators distinguished from long-term denominators?

Required materials and conditions: Group-specific allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis denominators
Conditions for verification: Group-specific allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis denominators; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N05 · Are long-term missingness, attrition and imputation assumptions verified?

Required materials and conditions: Five-year follow-up losses, group-specific reasons, models and sensitivity analysis
Conditions for verification: Five-year follow-up losses, group-specific reasons, models and sensitivity analysis; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N06 · Are the original intervention identity and research exposure retained?

Required materials and conditions: 52- and 12-week program, meetings, access and actual-use specifications
Conditions for verification: 52- and 12-week program, meetings, access and actual-use specifications; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N07 · Are additional exposure and cross-group program use after the program known?

Required materials and conditions: Post-program weight management, program use, co-exposure and changes
Conditions for verification: Post-program weight management, program use, co-exposure and changes; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N08 · Are the definition and measurement methods for five-year weight verified?

Required materials and conditions: Assessment timing, equipment, actual measurement, units and assessors
Conditions for verification: Assessment timing, equipment, actual measurement, units and assessors; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N09 · What difference and interval were directly reported at five years?

Required materials and conditions: Selected between-group difference, confidence interval and analysis comparison
Conditions for verification: Selected between-group difference, confidence interval and analysis comparison; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N10 · Has a null result been recast as exact zero or equivalence?

Required materials and conditions: Superiority question, effect interval, original interpretation and equivalence criteria
Conditions for verification: Superiority question, effect interval, original interpretation and equivalence criteria; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N11 · Are maintained weight loss within each group and between-group superiority the same question?

Required materials and conditions: Actual group-specific baseline, change, maintenance and between-group differences
Conditions for verification: Actual group-specific baseline, change, maintenance and between-group differences; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N12 · Have original 12-month results been reused as long-term results?

Required materials and conditions: Time-specific separation of one-year and five-year comparisons
Conditions for verification: Time-specific separation of one-year and five-year comparisons; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N13 · Are 24-month and five-year results kept separate?

Required materials and conditions: Actual estimates, denominators and analyses for intermediate and long-term comparisons
Conditions for verification: Actual estimates, denominators and analyses for intermediate and long-term comparisons; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N14 · Are the long-term effect of interest and analysis model known?

Required materials and conditions: Adjustment, covariates, analysis population and estimand for the five-year comparison
Conditions for verification: Adjustment, covariates, analysis population and estimand for the five-year comparison; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N15 · Are original allocation and five-year follow-up masking/selection effects distinguished?

Required materials and conditions: Original allocation, follow-up participation, assessor roles and attrition
Conditions for verification: Original allocation, follow-up participation, assessor roles and attrition; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N16 · Have the prespecified long-term endpoint plan and hierarchy been read?

Required materials and conditions: Long-term assessment plan, SAP, plan changes and multiplicity documents
Conditions for verification: Long-term assessment plan, SAP, plan changes and multiplicity documents; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N17 · Are registration identifiers separated from actual reading of registration/plans?

Required materials and conditions: Actual ISRCTN registration, pre-recruitment plan and long-term update materials
Conditions for verification: Actual ISRCTN registration, pre-recruitment plan and long-term update materials; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N18 · Have sample-size assumptions or important differences become long-term criteria?

Required materials and conditions: Original criteria for five-year importance, power and precision
Conditions for verification: Original criteria for five-year importance, power and precision; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N19 · Has long-term weight comparison been extended to clinical, functional or economic outcomes?

Required materials and conditions: Direct results for weight versus disease, function and economic endpoints
Conditions for verification: Direct results for weight versus disease, function and economic endpoints; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N20 · Have follow-up reports from the same cohort been counted as independent replication?

Required materials and conditions: Linkage of main report, follow-up, registration and sibling sheets
Conditions for verification: Linkage of main report, follow-up, registration and sibling sheets; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N21 · Is there evidence for other independent long-term replication or other programs?

Required materials and conditions: Independent long-term follow-up of the same question and direct setting-specific comparisons
Conditions for verification: Independent long-term follow-up of the same question and direct setting-specific comparisons; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N22 · Are original-trial industry, public and nonprofit support all retained?

Required materials and conditions: Funding, program-access support and industry-partner relationships
Conditions for verification: Funding, program-access support and industry-partner relationships; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N23 · Has research funding received by authors’ institutions become company-employee authorship?

Required materials and conditions: Institutional support, employment, author contributions and conflicts of interest
Conditions for verification: Institutional support, employment, author contributions and conflicts of interest; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N24 · Are analysis, medical writing, publication fees and data/publication control known?

Required materials and conditions: Original/follow-up sponsor and author role disclosures
Conditions for verification: Original/follow-up sponsor and author role disclosures; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N25 · Has the main report’s intervention-related adverse-event account become five-year harms evidence?

Required materials and conditions: Long-term event collection, definitions, group denominators and causal classification
Conditions for verification: Long-term event collection, definitions, group denominators and causal classification; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N26 · Does a null five-year result also establish equal safety between durations?

Required materials and conditions: Direct long-term harms comparisons, denominators, intervals and plans
Conditions for verification: Direct long-term harms comparisons, denominators, intervals and plans; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N27 · Is the observation scope sufficient to judge long-term and rare harms?

Required materials and conditions: Materials on long-term exposure, attrition, rare events and vulnerable populations
Conditions for verification: Materials on long-term exposure, attrition, rare events and vulnerable populations; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N28 · Has the current five-year follow-up full text actually been read?

Required materials and conditions: Access distinctions between preserved summary, follow-up repository, abstracts, full texts, registration and plans
Conditions for verification: Access distinctions between preserved summary, follow-up repository, abstracts, full texts, registration and plans; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N29 · Are reference dates, corrections, Korean/English and axes distinct from the selected long-term verdict?

Required materials and conditions: Complete original parent and original long-term subclaim
Conditions for verification: Complete original parent and original long-term subclaim; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

N30 · Are candidate states and the existing selected unit distinct from preparation/content review?

Required materials and conditions: Question/record links, historical candidate values and condition-freeze/application events
Conditions for verification: Question/record links, historical candidate values and condition-freeze/application events; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Referenced methods and the sections actually reviewed

M03 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08

Official methodology · §3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.3, MECIR C5/C7/C13

Referenced principle: Clearly record the question, eligibility conditions and reasons for changes, and distinguish variations in interventions.
Extent of review: Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed.

M04 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5.1 (2025), chapter updated 2025-03

Official methodology · §4.5, §4.6.1–4.6.3, MECIR C42

Referenced principle: Distinguish studies from reports and link them; do not omit a study solely because results are unreported.
Extent of review: Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed.

M08 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10

Official methodology · §8.1–8.2.3, Table 8.2.a

Referenced principle: Define the outcome and effect of interest, then examine randomization, deviations, missing data, measurement and selective reporting.
Extent of review: Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed.

M15 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08

Official methodology · §15.2.4, §15.3.1–15.3.3

Referenced principle: Distinguish effect estimates, intervals, importance and applicability. Sample size alone does not determine precision.
Extent of review: Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed.

M19 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10

Official methodology · §19.1.2, §19.2.1–19.2.4

Referenced principle: Harm questions may require different designs, populations and follow-up from efficacy questions. Case reports do not establish incidence rates.
Extent of review: Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed.

What the statuses mean

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

Change history

2026-10-12 · Public page/material version 1.0

The public page and data were prepared from the existing 30 items. No new clinical search, verification-status change or scoring was performed.

The stored-material review date (Not recorded) and original evidence cut-off (2026-08-26) were retained unchanged.

Researcher downloads

These materials provide the same evidence, scope and verification status as this page.

View all item details

N01 · What are the selected long-term question and original subclaim verdict?

Current findings: The selected preserved account concerns maintained superiority at five years, original grade D, with the note that the difference of -0.80 kg and 95% CI -2.13 to 0.54 was a null result.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Parent C with 50 points and axes concern the 12-month question. Absent selected-record score, status and axes remain absent; no new verdict is made.
Required materials and conditions: Original wording, grade/note and parent context for maintained superiority at five years
Materials to obtain first: Original subclaim and parent verdict
Further research: Distinguish the original long-term verdict from the parent one-year verdict.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Original wording, grade/note and parent context for maintained superiority at five years; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N02 · What duration and comparison does long-term superiority concern?

Current findings: The five-year result is the WRAP 52- versus 12-week weight difference. Both groups received access to the same active WW program for different durations.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: This is not recast as an effect of five years of continuous participation or the long-term effect of 52 weeks versus brief intervention.
Required materials and conditions: Five-year between-group comparison of allocation to program access for 52 versus 12 weeks
Materials to obtain first: Long-term comparison definition, allocated durations and subsequent participation records
Further research: Present allocated program-access duration separately from five-year assessment timing.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Five-year between-group comparison of allocation to program access for 52 versus 12 weeks; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N03 · Which original-trial population does five-year follow-up concern?

Current findings: The original trial enrolled 1,267 adults with BMI at least 28 in UK primary care; the five-year bibliography concerns follow-up of the same WRAP trial.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: It is not established that all originally allocated participants entered five-year follow-up or retained the same eligibility. Details of the long-term measured population are absent.
Required materials and conditions: Linkage between original allocation and long-term follow-up eligibility/observed populations
Materials to obtain first: Participant flow and characteristics from original allocation to five-year follow-up
Further research: Link the original recruited population with long-term observed/analysis populations.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Linkage between original allocation and long-term follow-up eligibility/observed populations; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N04 · Are original allocation denominators distinguished from long-term denominators?

Current findings: Original allocation denominators were 211 for brief intervention, 528 for 12 weeks and 528 for 52 weeks. The 823 with measured weight at 12 months concern one year.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Five-year group-specific measured/analysis denominators are absent from the summary; neither 528 nor 823 is used as a five-year denominator. No new totals are calculated.
Required materials and conditions: Group-specific allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis denominators
Materials to obtain first: Five-year group-specific measurement, analysis and attrition denominator tables
Further research: Separate original allocation, one-year observation and five-year observation denominators.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Group-specific allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis denominators; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N05 · Are long-term missingness, attrition and imputation assumptions verified?

Current findings: The original materials describe 35% missing measured weight at 12 months and multiple imputation. Long-term bibliography and the five-year effect are present, but five-year missingness details are absent.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The one-year 35%, 65% and multiple imputation are not automatically applied as five-year values or methods.
Required materials and conditions: Five-year follow-up losses, group-specific reasons, models and sensitivity analysis
Materials to obtain first: Original five-year missingness, imputation and sensitivity-analysis materials
Further research: Present missingness materials and assumptions separately for each time point.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Five-year follow-up losses, group-specific reasons, models and sensitivity analysis; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N06 · Are the original intervention identity and research exposure retained?

Current findings: The parent intervention is the WW program with one group meeting per week for 52 weeks; the comparator also received access to the same program for 12 weeks.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The original allocated duration is not five years. No new program-use, diet, exercise or treatment instructions are provided.
Required materials and conditions: 52- and 12-week program, meetings, access and actual-use specifications
Materials to obtain first: Duration-specific program specifications, use and attendance materials
Further research: Retain the identities of the research exposure and long-term assessment.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: 52- and 12-week program, meetings, access and actual-use specifications; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N07 · Are additional exposure and cross-group program use after the program known?

Current findings: Five-year follow-up assessment is recorded, but participants’ subsequent program use and other weight-management exposure are absent from the summary.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The five-year difference is not attributed solely to the original duration, and no additional-exposure or treatment-change instructions are created.
Required materials and conditions: Post-program weight management, program use, co-exposure and changes
Materials to obtain first: Records of subsequent programs, accompanying management and changes
Further research: Distinguish the original period from subsequent exposure.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Post-program weight management, program use, co-exposure and changes; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N08 · Are the definition and measurement methods for five-year weight verified?

Current findings: The long-term summary presents the five-year 52- versus 12-week weight difference in kg.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Five-year measurement procedures, equipment, standardization, assessors and possible self-report remain externally unread. The outcome is not replaced by other body-composition results.
Required materials and conditions: Assessment timing, equipment, actual measurement, units and assessors
Materials to obtain first: Five-year measurement methods and original outcome tables
Further research: Present measurement timing, units and methods together.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Assessment timing, equipment, actual measurement, units and assessors; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N09 · What difference and interval were directly reported at five years?

Current findings: The preserved account states a five-year difference of -0.80 kg, 95% CI -2.13 to 0.54, a null result.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The original materials contain no five-year P value; none is created. No new CI, effect, relative weight loss or individual numerical example is calculated.
Required materials and conditions: Selected between-group difference, confidence interval and analysis comparison
Materials to obtain first: Original five-year between-group comparison results and model tables
Further research: Present the original difference/interval together with the absence of test information.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Selected between-group difference, confidence interval and analysis comparison; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N10 · Has a null result been recast as exact zero or equivalence?

Current findings: The original subclaim and parent counterview state that the five-year difference was null and durable superiority was not established.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Null results do not become exactly equal weights, zero effect, noninferiority or certified equivalence. Prespecified equivalence criteria are absent from the summary.
Required materials and conditions: Superiority question, effect interval, original interpretation and equivalence criteria
Materials to obtain first: Long-term question, analyses and prespecified comparison criteria
Further research: Distinguish unestablished superiority from the scope of an equivalence claim.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Superiority question, effect interval, original interpretation and equivalence criteria; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N11 · Are maintained weight loss within each group and between-group superiority the same question?

Current findings: The preserved long-term value is a 52- versus 12-week between-group weight difference.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Five-year absolute weights, maintained loss and regained weight by group are absent from the summary. A null between-group result does not mean everyone returned to baseline or both groups lost all weight-loss benefits.
Required materials and conditions: Actual group-specific baseline, change, maintenance and between-group differences
Materials to obtain first: Five-year group-specific baseline, change and between-group comparison tables
Further research: Separate within-group maintenance from relative between-group superiority.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Actual group-specific baseline, change, maintenance and between-group differences; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N12 · Have original 12-month results been reused as long-term results?

Current findings: At 12 months, changes were -4.75 kg for 12 weeks and -6.76 kg for 52 weeks; adjusted difference -2.14 kg, 95% CI -3.05 to -1.22, P<.0001.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: A positive one-year result does not fill the five-year superiority question. No new maintenance rate is calculated from one-year group changes and the five-year difference.
Required materials and conditions: Time-specific separation of one-year and five-year comparisons
Materials to obtain first: Original within-group and between-group results by time point
Further research: Present positive 12-month and null five-year results separately.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Time-specific separation of one-year and five-year comparisons; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N13 · Are 24-month and five-year results kept separate?

Current findings: The 24-month difference is described as -1.32 kg, 95% CI -2.46 to -0.18, P=.0231, a different time point from five years.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The 24-month P value is not copied as a five-year P value. An intermediate positive result does not become long-term maintenance or independent replication.
Required materials and conditions: Actual estimates, denominators and analyses for intermediate and long-term comparisons
Materials to obtain first: Original 24-month and five-year follow-up/analysis materials
Further research: Present results separately for intermediate and long-term time points.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Actual estimates, denominators and analyses for intermediate and long-term comparisons; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N14 · Are the long-term effect of interest and analysis model known?

Current findings: The preserved counterview and subclaim note contain a five-year between-group difference and CI; details of the long-term model are absent.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The one-year adjusted model or multiple-imputation method is not assumed to be the long-term model, nor upgraded to an effect of actual attendance or completers.
Required materials and conditions: Adjustment, covariates, analysis population and estimand for the five-year comparison
Materials to obtain first: Five-year model, effect-of-interest and sensitivity-analysis specifications
Further research: Distinguish time-specific estimands and missingness assumptions.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Adjustment, covariates, analysis population and estimand for the five-year comparison; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N15 · Are original allocation and five-year follow-up masking/selection effects distinguished?

Current findings: The original evidence describes a three-arm randomized controlled trial; the five-year citation concerns follow-up of the same trial.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Long-term follow-up is not a new randomized trial. Details of participation/measurement selection and masking remain unread.
Required materials and conditions: Original allocation, follow-up participation, assessor roles and attrition
Materials to obtain first: Long-term follow-up procedures, participant flow and assessor methods
Further research: Present retained original allocation together with limitations of follow-up selection.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Original allocation, follow-up participation, assessor roles and attrition; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N16 · Have the prespecified long-term endpoint plan and hierarchy been read?

Current findings: The original primary endpoint was weight at one year, and prespecified hierarchical testing describes one-year comparisons; the long-term bibliography concerns five-year follow-up.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The one-year prespecified hierarchy does not certify a five-year confirmatory plan. The long-term plan and change history remain unread.
Required materials and conditions: Long-term assessment plan, SAP, plan changes and multiplicity documents
Materials to obtain first: Long-term follow-up plan, SAP and change history
Further research: Distinguish the original primary plan from long-term plans/reporting.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Long-term assessment plan, SAP, plan changes and multiplicity documents; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N17 · Are registration identifiers separated from actual reading of registration/plans?

Current findings: The identifier is ISRCTN82857232, and the original summary states registration preceded recruitment.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Exact registration dates, additional long-term plans, changes and original documents remain unread. No invented URL/identifier certifies external reading or long-term prespecification.
Required materials and conditions: Actual ISRCTN registration, pre-recruitment plan and long-term update materials
Materials to obtain first: ISRCTN registration history and long-term follow-up documents
Further research: Present the original identifier separately from planning materials for each time point.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Actual ISRCTN registration, pre-recruitment plan and long-term update materials; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N18 · Have sample-size assumptions or important differences become long-term criteria?

Current findings: The original study describes a sample of 1,200 and a 1.3 kg detection assumption, while stating this was not a declared minimum clinically important difference.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: This assumption does not become a five-year MCID, equivalence margin or certified power. Long-term criteria and denominators remain unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Original criteria for five-year importance, power and precision
Materials to obtain first: Long-term sample-size, importance and comparison-criterion materials
Further research: Distinguish one-year detection assumptions from long-term judgment criteria.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Original criteria for five-year importance, power and precision; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N19 · Has long-term weight comparison been extended to clinical, functional or economic outcomes?

Current findings: The follow-up citation title mentions effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, but the preserved result concerns five-year weight comparison.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Disease prevention, mortality, function, quality of life, cost-effectiveness results and hypothetical quantitative examples are not created to fill gaps.
Required materials and conditions: Direct results for weight versus disease, function and economic endpoints
Materials to obtain first: Original long-term clinical, functional and economic endpoint materials
Further research: Present weight superiority separately from other direct endpoints.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Direct results for weight versus disease, function and economic endpoints; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N20 · Have follow-up reports from the same cohort been counted as independent replication?

Current findings: The 2017 main report and 2022 five-year follow-up concern the same WRAP trial; the original citation flag identifies long-term follow-up of the same trial.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Two reports, sibling sheets, groups, time points and registration are not counted as new independent trials or participant totals. Confirmed trial/participant counts remain unrecorded.
Required materials and conditions: Linkage of main report, follow-up, registration and sibling sheets
Materials to obtain first: WRAP report, registration and cohort-linkage materials
Further research: Separate report slots from independent-trial and participant units.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Linkage of main report, follow-up, registration and sibling sheets; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N21 · Is there evidence for other independent long-term replication or other programs?

Current findings: The current preserved summary identifies the main and long-term reports of the same WRAP trial.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: No new durable effects or replication counts are established for other programs, services without a formulation, all weight management or other populations.
Required materials and conditions: Independent long-term follow-up of the same question and direct setting-specific comparisons
Materials to obtain first: Independent long-term replication and applicability materials for the same comparison
Further research: Distinguish follow-up in the same cohort from gaps in independent long-term replication.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Independent long-term follow-up of the same question and direct setting-specific comparisons; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N22 · Are original-trial industry, public and nonprofit support all retained?

Current findings: Public/nonprofit joint funding, Weight Watchers International industry-partner funding and program-access provision are all recorded.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Mixed support is not relabeled as entirely public or independent. Separate support for the follow-up report is not detailed in the summary.
Required materials and conditions: Funding, program-access support and industry-partner relationships
Materials to obtain first: Original/follow-up funding and program-support disclosures
Further research: Distinguish original-trial support from follow-up-report support.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Funding, program-access support and industry-partner relationships; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N23 · Has research funding received by authors’ institutions become company-employee authorship?

Current findings: The preserved account states that institutions of five authors disclosed receipt of WW research funding.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Institutional support does not establish employee authorship. Follow-up author-specific disclosures, roles and relationships remain externally unread.
Required materials and conditions: Institutional support, employment, author contributions and conflicts of interest
Materials to obtain first: Original/follow-up author disclosures and contribution materials
Further research: Separate institutional support from employment relationships and individual roles.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Institutional support, employment, author contributions and conflicts of interest; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N24 · Are analysis, medical writing, publication fees and data/publication control known?

Current findings: The summary provides mixed funding, program access and institutional-support relationships; the complete long-term analysis/writing/publication roles are absent.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Nonmention does not certify all roles were absent or establish independent replication.
Required materials and conditions: Original/follow-up sponsor and author role disclosures
Materials to obtain first: Long-term analysis, writing, publication and data-control disclosures
Further research: Record reported support separately from unverified roles.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Original/follow-up sponsor and author role disclosures; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N25 · Has the main report’s intervention-related adverse-event account become five-year harms evidence?

Current findings: The safety summary states that no intervention-related adverse events were reported, while an all-event table by group was absent.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: The exact follow-up/recruited-population scope of this statement is not extended to all long-term follow-up. Five-year all-event and related-event materials remain unverified.
Required materials and conditions: Long-term event collection, definitions, group denominators and causal classification
Materials to obtain first: Five-year harms, discontinuation, exposure and classification tables
Further research: Separate the main-report safety statement from long-term harms materials.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Long-term event collection, definitions, group denominators and causal classification; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N26 · Does a null five-year result also establish equal safety between durations?

Current findings: The original advertising interpretation and safety explanation explicitly limit extension to long-term maintenance or equal safety.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Null weight results do not become null harms results, equivalence or confirmed safety.
Required materials and conditions: Direct long-term harms comparisons, denominators, intervals and plans
Materials to obtain first: Duration-specific long-term harms, comparisons and criteria
Further research: Separate the weight-superiority question from safety comparison.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Direct long-term harms comparisons, denominators, intervals and plans; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N27 · Is the observation scope sufficient to judge long-term and rare harms?

Current findings: Long-term bibliography is present, but safety details in the preserved summary are limited. Parent Good safety is an original-verdict record.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Subsequent weight values or parent labels do not fill absence of rare harms, long-term safety or safety in all populations.
Required materials and conditions: Materials on long-term exposure, attrition, rare events and vulnerable populations
Materials to obtain first: Long-term events, exposure and population-specific harms materials
Further research: Present long-term weight observation separately from rare-harm gaps.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Materials on long-term exposure, attrition, rare events and vulnerable populations; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R02

N28 · Has the current five-year follow-up full text actually been read?

Current findings: What was actually read was the complete parent preserved summary. The five-year citation’s Cambridge repository URL and main-report PubMed URL are linked as preserved.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: A repository link does not mean full-text acquisition, reading or content review. All external abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread.
Required materials and conditions: Access distinctions between preserved summary, follow-up repository, abstracts, full texts, registration and plans
Materials to obtain first: Each original report, follow-up, registration and planning material
Further research: Display summary reading separately from external nonreading.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Access distinctions between preserved summary, follow-up repository, abstracts, full texts, registration and plans; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N29 · Are reference dates, corrections, Korean/English and axes distinct from the selected long-term verdict?

Current findings: The complete summary retains parent Korean/English, axes, 2026-08-26 reference date, empty corrections/deliberation and the long-term subclaim.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: Absent subclaim score, status and axes are not filled with parent C, 50 points, E+ or other values. The reference date is not the current-review date.
Required materials and conditions: Complete original parent and original long-term subclaim
Materials to obtain first: Original summary and preparation events
Further research: Distinguish parent history, long-term subclaim and preparation date.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Complete original parent and original long-term subclaim; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02

N30 · Are candidate states and the existing selected unit distinct from preparation/content review?

Current findings: The selected existing subclaim is prepared while distinguishing question and verdict-record links. Candidate pending, eligibility and independence labels are retained as original-selection history.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: Summary read; external materials unread
Why unverified: 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.
Reason for missing information: A review wait is not executed or activated; completed=false and existing-content review incomplete are displayed. New units number 0 and confirmed independence totals are unrecorded; no treatment/weight-loss instructions are created.
Required materials and conditions: Question/record links, historical candidate values and condition-freeze/application events
Materials to obtain first: Existing question selection and condition-freeze/application preparation events
Further research: Display saved preparation separately from user content review and clinical certification.
Remaining uncertainty: External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAP remain unread; no content review, calculation or new query was performed in this preparation.
Conditions for verification: Question/record links, historical candidate values and condition-freeze/application events; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.
Why this condition is needed: Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question
Application exceptions: Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.
Referenced methods: Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.

Related sources R01 R02