{
  "schema_version": "chamgap-public-criteria-1.0",
  "title": "WW 52 versus 12 weeks · Maintained superiority at five years — Evidence Check",
  "language": "en",
  "translation_date": "2026-10-12",
  "criteria_version": "1.0",
  "criteria_date": "2026-10-06",
  "condition_origin": "Chamgap's own application conditions",
  "method_sources": [
    {
      "id": "M03",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-03",
      "section": "§3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.3, MECIR C5/C7/C13",
      "official_principle": "Clearly record the question, eligibility conditions and reasons for changes, and distinguish variations in interventions.",
      "review_level": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "id": "M04",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5.1 (2025), chapter updated 2025-03",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-04",
      "section": "§4.5, §4.6.1–4.6.3, MECIR C42",
      "official_principle": "Distinguish studies from reports and link them; do not omit a study solely because results are unreported.",
      "review_level": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "id": "M08",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-08",
      "section": "§8.1–8.2.3, Table 8.2.a",
      "official_principle": "Define the outcome and effect of interest, then examine randomization, deviations, missing data, measurement and selective reporting.",
      "review_level": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "id": "M15",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-15",
      "section": "§15.2.4, §15.3.1–15.3.3",
      "official_principle": "Distinguish effect estimates, intervals, importance and applicability. Sample size alone does not determine precision.",
      "review_level": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    },
    {
      "id": "M19",
      "version": "Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10",
      "url": "https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-19",
      "section": "§19.1.2, §19.2.1–19.2.4",
      "official_principle": "Harm questions may require different designs, populations and follow-up from efficacy questions. Case reports do not establish incidence rates.",
      "review_level": "Link preserved methodological application records; no current clinical-content reassessment or external-link verification was performed."
    }
  ],
  "status_dictionary": {
    "Partly verified": "Some information exists in the preserved review summary; detailed original materials remain unverified. This does not certify a passed review or clinical efficacy.",
    "Unverified": "Detailed materials for the selected condition could not be established within the stored scope; this does not mean zero effect, zero studies or safety",
    "Review incomplete": "Review of existing content incomplete",
    "Met": "Use only within the relevant conditions after existing content review; no automatic designation in this preparation",
    "Not reported": "Distinguish only within materials actually read; do not turn unread external materials into unreported findings",
    "Inaccessible": "Not applied during this preparation because actual access was not tested",
    "Not applicable": "Use with a reason for non-applicability based on an explicit question boundary",
    "Conflicting data": "Judge after actual material comparison; review was not performed during this preparation",
    "Insufficient evidence for the conditions": "Do not use as a clinical grade encompassing currently unread materials"
  },
  "requirements": [
    {
      "item_id": "N01",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What are the selected long-term question and original subclaim verdict?",
      "needed": "Original wording, grade/note and parent context for maintained superiority at five years",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Original wording, 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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish the original long-term verdict from the parent one-year verdict."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N02",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What duration and comparison does long-term superiority concern?",
      "needed": "Five-year between-group comparison of allocation to program access for 52 versus 12 weeks",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present allocated program-access duration separately from five-year assessment timing."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N03",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Which original-trial population does five-year follow-up concern?",
      "needed": "Linkage between original allocation and long-term follow-up eligibility/observed populations",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Link the original recruited population with long-term observed/analysis populations."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N04",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are original allocation denominators distinguished from long-term denominators?",
      "needed": "Group-specific allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis denominators",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Group-specific allocation, follow-up, measurement and analysis denominators; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Separate original allocation, one-year observation and five-year observation denominators."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N05",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are long-term missingness, attrition and imputation assumptions verified?",
      "needed": "Five-year follow-up losses, group-specific reasons, models and sensitivity analysis",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present missingness materials and assumptions separately for each time point."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N06",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the original intervention identity and research exposure retained?",
      "needed": "52- and 12-week program, meetings, access and actual-use specifications",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Retain the identities of the research exposure and long-term assessment."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N07",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are additional exposure and cross-group program use after the program known?",
      "needed": "Post-program weight management, program use, co-exposure and changes",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish the original period from subsequent exposure."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N08",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the definition and measurement methods for five-year weight verified?",
      "needed": "Assessment timing, equipment, actual measurement, units and assessors",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Assessment timing, equipment, actual measurement, units and assessors; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present measurement timing, units and methods together."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N09",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What difference and interval were directly reported at five years?",
      "needed": "Selected between-group difference, confidence interval and analysis comparison",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Selected between-group difference, confidence interval and analysis comparison; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present the original difference/interval together with the absence of test information."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N10",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Has a null result been recast as exact zero or equivalence?",
      "needed": "Superiority question, effect interval, original interpretation and equivalence criteria",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Superiority question, effect interval, original interpretation and equivalence criteria; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish unestablished superiority from the scope of an equivalence claim."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N11",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are maintained weight loss within each group and between-group superiority the same question?",
      "needed": "Actual group-specific baseline, change, maintenance and between-group differences",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Actual group-specific baseline, change, maintenance and between-group differences; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Separate within-group maintenance from relative between-group superiority."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N12",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Have original 12-month results been reused as long-term results?",
      "needed": "Time-specific separation of one-year and five-year comparisons",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present positive 12-month and null five-year results separately."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N13",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are 24-month and five-year results kept separate?",
      "needed": "Actual estimates, denominators and analyses for intermediate and long-term comparisons",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present results separately for intermediate and long-term time points."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N14",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are the long-term effect of interest and analysis model known?",
      "needed": "Adjustment, covariates, analysis population and estimand for the five-year comparison",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish time-specific estimands and missingness assumptions."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N15",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are original allocation and five-year follow-up masking/selection effects distinguished?",
      "needed": "Original allocation, follow-up participation, assessor roles and attrition",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Original allocation, follow-up participation, assessor roles and attrition; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present retained original allocation together with limitations of follow-up selection."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N16",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Have the prespecified long-term endpoint plan and hierarchy been read?",
      "needed": "Long-term assessment plan, SAP, plan changes and multiplicity documents",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish the original primary plan from long-term plans/reporting."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N17",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are registration identifiers separated from actual reading of registration/plans?",
      "needed": "Actual ISRCTN registration, pre-recruitment plan and long-term update materials",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present the original identifier separately from planning materials for each time point."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N18",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Have sample-size assumptions or important differences become long-term criteria?",
      "needed": "Original criteria for five-year importance, power and precision",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Original criteria for five-year importance, power and precision; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish one-year detection assumptions from long-term judgment criteria."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N19",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Has long-term weight comparison been extended to clinical, functional or economic outcomes?",
      "needed": "Direct results for weight versus disease, function and economic endpoints",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Direct results for weight versus disease, function and economic endpoints; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present weight superiority separately from other direct endpoints."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N20",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Have follow-up reports from the same cohort been counted as independent replication?",
      "needed": "Linkage of main report, follow-up, registration and sibling sheets",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Separate report slots from independent-trial and participant units."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N21",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Is there evidence for other independent long-term replication or other programs?",
      "needed": "Independent long-term follow-up of the same question and direct setting-specific comparisons",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish follow-up in the same cohort from gaps in independent long-term replication."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N22",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are original-trial industry, public and nonprofit support all retained?",
      "needed": "Funding, program-access support and industry-partner relationships",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Funding, program-access support and industry-partner relationships; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish original-trial support from follow-up-report support."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N23",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Has research funding received by authors’ institutions become company-employee authorship?",
      "needed": "Institutional support, employment, author contributions and conflicts of interest",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Institutional support, employment, author contributions and conflicts of interest; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Separate institutional support from employment relationships and individual roles."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N24",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are analysis, medical writing, publication fees and data/publication control known?",
      "needed": "Original/follow-up sponsor and author role disclosures",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Original/follow-up sponsor and author role disclosures; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Record reported support separately from unverified roles."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N25",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "Has the main report’s intervention-related adverse-event account become five-year harms evidence?",
      "needed": "Long-term event collection, definitions, group denominators and causal classification",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Separate the main-report safety statement from long-term harms materials."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N26",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "Does a null five-year result also establish equal safety between durations?",
      "needed": "Direct long-term harms comparisons, denominators, intervals and plans",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Direct long-term harms comparisons, denominators, intervals and plans; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Separate the weight-superiority question from safety comparison."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N27",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "Is the observation scope sufficient to judge long-term and rare harms?",
      "needed": "Materials on long-term exposure, attrition, rare events and vulnerable populations",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing harms/safety-material scope separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Present long-term weight observation separately from rare-harm gaps."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N28",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Has the current five-year follow-up full text actually been read?",
      "needed": "Access distinctions between preserved summary, follow-up repository, abstracts, full texts, registration and plans",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Display summary reading separately from external nonreading."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N29",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are reference dates, corrections, Korean/English and axes distinct from the selected long-term verdict?",
      "needed": "Complete original parent and original long-term subclaim",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "Complete original parent and original long-term subclaim; distinguish direct materials, denominators, scope and unverified matters without new effects, verdicts or independence certification.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish parent history, long-term subclaim and preparation date."
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N30",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are candidate states and the existing selected unit distinct from preparation/content review?",
      "needed": "Question/record links, historical candidate values and condition-freeze/application events",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition clearly showing required evidence, current materials and gaps for the selected question",
      "application_exception": "Retain original values/scope only; other groups, time points, outcomes or formulations do not fill unverified matters.",
      "criterion": "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.",
      "basis": "Existing application conditions and preserved methodological links are retained for preparation; this does not indicate completed review of the whole definition.",
      "condition_origin": "Newly written preparation conditions; existing content review remains incomplete, without automatic content-review gate approval",
      "proposed_research": "Display saved preparation separately from user content review and clinical certification."
    }
  ]
}