{
  "schema_version": "chamgap-public-criteria-1.0",
  "title": "Iodine-alcohol preparation · Open-fracture surgical-site infection — Evidence Check",
  "language": "en",
  "translation_date": "2026-10-13",
  "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": "Is the selected subclaim reduced infection after open-fracture fixation?",
      "needed": "Distinction between original selected question, subclaim grade/note and parent verdict",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Distinction between original selected question, subclaim grade/note and parent verdict; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present the original records so the user can read the subclaim separately from parent context"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N02",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Can the positive closed-fracture result be applied to open fractures?",
      "needed": "Materials separating populations and estimated results of the two prespecified cohorts",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Materials separating populations and estimated results of the two prespecified cohorts; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present population-specific estimates and applicability side by side"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N03",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What is the actual denominator for the open-fracture analysis?",
      "needed": "Open-fracture denominators for recruitment, assignment and analysis populations",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Open-fracture denominators for recruitment, assignment and analysis populations; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present clusters, people and group-specific analysis denominators separately"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N04",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are open-fracture severity and anatomical scope verified?",
      "needed": "Open-fracture locations, injury severity, eligibility and exclusion criteria",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Open-fracture locations, injury severity, eligibility and exclusion criteria; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present the actual selected population and scope separately in the original report"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N05",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What are the two alcohol preparations compared in the trial?",
      "needed": "Original identities of iodine-alcohol and chlorhexidine-alcohol formulations",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Original identities of iodine-alcohol and chlorhexidine-alcohol formulations; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Preserve formulation identities and applicability limits"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N06",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Can this be extended to other antiseptics or surgeries?",
      "needed": "Direct evidence matching the actual formulations and surgical context",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Direct evidence matching the actual formulations and surgical context; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Express formulation- and surgery-specific results as separate questions"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N07",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are concurrent antibiotics, irrigation and fixation exposures accounted for in the group comparison?",
      "needed": "Actual surgery, antibiotics, injury care and deviation information by group",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Actual surgery, antibiotics, injury care and deviation information by group; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present concurrent exposures and deviations by group"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N08",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What are the randomization unit and alternating-use structure?",
      "needed": "Design materials distinguishing hospitals, cluster-periods and individuals",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Design materials distinguishing hospitals, cluster-periods and individuals; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present assignment units separately from participant units"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N09",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What is the scope of current evidence on allocation sequence and concealment?",
      "needed": "Allocation wording in the preserved summary actually read and original methods materials",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Allocation wording in the preserved summary actually read and original methods materials; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present cluster-allocation implementation separately from recruitment timing"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N10",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Were crossover periods and temporal effects reflected in open-fracture effect estimation?",
      "needed": "Specifications of period effects, cluster correlation, crossover and analysis model",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Specifications of period effects, cluster correlation, crossover and analysis model; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present period and cluster handling from the original model"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N11",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What are the SSI definition and ascertainment times?",
      "needed": "Adjudication criteria and periods for superficial, deep and organ-space infection",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Adjudication criteria and periods for superficial, deep and organ-space infection; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present results by definition, time and infection type"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N12",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are infection-adjudication masking and surgical-team masking distinguished?",
      "needed": "Masking scope for outcome adjudicators and actual surgical teams",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Masking scope for outcome adjudicators and actual surgical teams; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish masking of outcome adjudication from intervention implementation"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N13",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Can the follow-up completion rate be used as an open-fracture denominator?",
      "needed": "Open-fracture group-specific follow-up completion, missingness and withdrawal reasons",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Open-fracture group-specific follow-up completion, missingness and withdrawal reasons; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present actual open-fracture follow-up and missingness denominators separately"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N14",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What are the analysis population of interest and assignment basis?",
      "needed": "Assignment-based analysis principles and actual inclusion/exclusion materials",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Assignment-based analysis principles and actual inclusion/exclusion materials; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish assignment effects from effects of preparations actually received"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N15",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are infection event counts and group denominators provided for open fractures?",
      "needed": "Original result tables including each group’s events, denominators and analysis units",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Original result tables including each group’s events, denominators and analysis units; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present actual open-fracture events together with analysis denominators"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N16",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "How are the open-fracture comparison effect and confidence interval recorded?",
      "needed": "Effect measure, interval and P value for the selected population",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Effect measure, interval and P value for the selected population; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present the original effect, interval, test and interpretation scope separately"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N17",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are an open-fracture absolute risk difference and interval available?",
      "needed": "Directly reported absolute effect and uncertainty for the selected population",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Directly reported absolute effect and uncertainty for the selected population; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "If an absolute effect is reported, present the selected population’s value and interval"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N18",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are open-fracture OR adjustment terms and target effect verified?",
      "needed": "Open-fracture adjustment model, covariates, cluster handling and effect of interest",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Open-fracture adjustment model, covariates, cluster handling and effect of interest; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present population-specific estimates’ meaning from the original report"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N19",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Were the open-fracture population and registration timing distinguished prospectively?",
      "needed": "Original population distinction, registration contents and dates",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Original population distinction, registration contents and dates; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present connections between population-specific plans and reported results"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N20",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are analysis plans, multiplicity and infection-subtype hierarchy verified?",
      "needed": "Protocol, SAP, subtype and population-specific testing plans",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Protocol, SAP, subtype and population-specific testing plans; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Connect the selected population’s prespecified analysis hierarchy with result tables"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N21",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Do different closed/open-fracture results prove interaction?",
      "needed": "Population-specific effects and formal interaction or direct-comparison analyses",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Population-specific effects and formal interaction or direct-comparison analyses; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish different-population results from direct tests of differences"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N22",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Were the report, registration and related sheets counted as independent repeat trials?",
      "needed": "Population, bibliography and registration connections in the same PREPARE report",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Population, bibliography and registration connections in the same PREPARE report; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Preserve report slots separately from trial and participant units"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N23",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "What evidence supports contrary results in other surgeries?",
      "needed": "Actual bibliography and populations for clean/contaminated-surgery and cesarean reports",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Actual bibliography and populations for clean/contaminated-surgery and cesarean reports; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present other-surgery results only as context for their own populations"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N24",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are long-term results and infection-type follow-up verified for the selected population?",
      "needed": "Open-fracture infection results by time and long-term clinical outcomes",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Open-fracture infection results by time and long-term clinical outcomes; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present infection-adjudication times separately from long-term clinical follow-up"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N25",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Is the material currently read the full original open-fracture paper?",
      "needed": "Access distinctions among summary copy, external abstract/full text, registration and plans",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Access distinctions among summary copy, external abstract/full text, registration and plans; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Mark summary reading separately from unread external materials"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N26",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are public funding and manufacturer-involvement items distinguished?",
      "needed": "Original research-funding, product-support, outsourced-analysis, medical-writing and publication-cost disclosures",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Original research-funding, product-support, outsourced-analysis, medical-writing and publication-cost disclosures; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Distinguish reported support from unknown involvement"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N27",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are author affiliations, company roles and data control verified?",
      "needed": "Employee-author, advisory, data-access, design, analysis and publication-role disclosures",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Employee-author, advisory, data-access, design, analysis and publication-role disclosures; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present public funding separately from author-specific independence"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N28",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "Can one-year reoperation be used as open-fracture harms or efficacy evidence?",
      "needed": "Actual population, group-specific denominators and definition for that outcome",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing limits of harms/safety information separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Actual population, group-specific denominators and definition for that outcome; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present reoperation, infection and populations separately"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N29",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "What is the scope of unreported chemical burns and intraoperative fires?",
      "needed": "Harms collection, event definitions, exposure and population denominators",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing limits of harms/safety information separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Harms collection, event definitions, exposure and population denominators; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present harms-reporting scope together with actual observation denominators"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N30",
      "question_type": "Supplementary harm evidence",
      "question": "Are long-term/rare harms and other wound-related events verified?",
      "needed": "Long-term exposure, follow-up and rare-event materials for the selected population",
      "role": "Supplementary",
      "role_reason": "Supplementary condition showing limits of harms/safety information separately from efficacy",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Long-term exposure, follow-up and rare-event materials for the selected population; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Present long-term harms gaps separately from efficacy"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N31",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are Korean/English prose, axes, reference date and correction history preserved in original form?",
      "needed": "Copies of parent Korean/English prose, axes, reference date, corrections and original subclaim",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Copies of parent Korean/English prose, axes, reference date, corrections and original subclaim; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Separate existing verdict, dates and corrections from this preparation event"
    },
    {
      "item_id": "N32",
      "question_type": "Efficacy comparison · Preserved-material preparation",
      "question": "Are historical candidate metadata and current preparation status separated?",
      "needed": "Distinction between existing selection and preparation, review and independence status",
      "role": "Required",
      "role_reason": "Preparation condition showing the selected question’s interpretation scope and needed materials; not an efficacy or completed-review score",
      "application_exception": "Keep unread and absent original materials as separate gaps; do not replace them with values for other populations, endpoints or formulations",
      "criterion": "Distinction between existing selection and preparation, review and independence status; record applicability and unverified matters without creating values, clinical verdicts or independence certification absent from original materials",
      "basis": "Existing applicability conditions and preserved methodology links are retained as a preparation copy; this does not establish a complete review of the definitions",
      "condition_origin": "Preparation conditions written under the existing content-review responsibility policy; not automatic QA, verdict or gateway completion",
      "proposed_research": "Connect original-record changes separately from preparation and existing content-review events"
    }
  ]
}