# Multicomponent digital weight management × Mean weight loss at 12 months

Verdict 2976 · Evidence Check

Stored-material review date: Not recorded  
Original evidence cut-off: 2026-08-26  
Review-criteria version: 1.0  
Public page/material preparation date: 2026-10-14

Clinical papers were not read directly; existing review summaries were checked. No new clinical-literature search was performed. Unverified does not mean that research is absent or that there is no effect.

## Assessment scope

- Population: 351 adults aged 21–65 with obesity at US community health centers, with at least one of hypertension, diabetes or hyperlipidemia. Original randomized denominators: 176 intervention/175 usual care. Detailed eligibility, baseline weight/conditions, visit-specific observations/analyses and attrition/missingness remain unverified.
- Ingredient, formulation and route: Multicomponent Track: app-based goal self-monitoring, algorithm-tailored feedback, daily cellular smart-scale weighing, 18 dietitian calls and clinician counseling based on electronic-record recommendations. Stand-alone app/scale/counseling effects cannot be separated. Only the research composition is preserved; no implementation instructions or recommendations are created.
- Dose: Only original planned elements such as 18 counseling calls and daily self-monitoring, and the 12-month evaluation, are preserved. Actual component-specific delivery/use, cumulative contacts, adherence and discontinuation remain unverified; completion by all participants is not assumed.
- Comparator: Parallel comparison with usual care. Actual control management, contact/support, use of other programs, concurrent medication/condition/lifestyle management and crossover use remain unverified. Usual care is not converted into no intervention or contact.
- Measured outcome: Standardized measured mean weight change at research visits at 12 months. Intervention −4.0 kg (95% CI −4.9 to −3.0), usual care −0.1 kg (−1.0 to 0.8) and between-group difference −3.8 kg (−5.0 to −2.5), P<0.001, are preserved as separate original estimands. At least 5% weight loss, 40% versus 17% with P<0.001, is a secondary proportion; proportions or event counts are not calculated from means.
- Duration: Study context for 12-month weight/responder outcomes. Visit windows, changes by time point, continuation/discontinuation beyond 12 months and long-term clinical/harm follow-up remain unverified.
- Questions outside this scope: Newly subtracting group-specific −4.0/−0.1 kg to recalculate the original between-group difference of −3.8 kg and CI; Calculating 5% attainment rates, responder events/denominators or individual outcomes from continuous mean change; Applying 176/175 to 40%/17% to calculate event counts or new differences/RR/OR/NNT/CIs; Automatically substituting daily smart-scale/app entries for standardized visit measurements or actual adjudication values for secondary proportions; Repurposing general ITT/prespecified maximum-likelihood narratives as complete verification of responder missingness/denominator rules; Upgrading the secondary 5% endpoint into a primary endpoint, prespecified success threshold, validated minimum clinically important difference or reductions in blood pressure/glucose/disease events; Repurposing the app/smart-scale/counseling bundle result as effects of a stand-alone app, individual components or all products/populations; Using 351 participants, 176/175, groups, time points, components, bibliography/registration or sibling sheets as new independent trial/participant totals; Judging non-reporting of pivotal-trial support as actual absence, or retrospectively confirming later WW/Coeus disclosures as original-trial relationships; Creating unlinked low-intensity null trials or later disclosures as new reports, direct refutations or independent replications; Inheriting original parent values, axes and historical verification as a subclaim score or current content review/registration/original-source reading; New calculations, invented quantities, effects/CIs, grades, independence certification, app/product recommendations or weight/diet/exercise/weight-loss/treatment-replacement instructions

## Checklist items

### N01 · Selected mean-weight claim and original grade

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The selected subclaim is “Mean weight loss at 12 months,” with grade C and a note of a −3.8 kg between-group difference. Subclaim score/status/axes are absent; the parent C56 is not used to fill the subclaim score.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Subclaim score, status and axes are absent. Mean results and reaching the 5% threshold are not combined as one endpoint. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Subclaim score, status and axes are absent. Mean results and reaching the 5% threshold are not combined as one endpoint.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between original wording/grade, parent score/axes and responder outcomes
- Materials to obtain first: Original selected subclaim and parent verdict, and user correction comments
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study specifying mean change and responder endpoints separately; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between original wording/grade, parent score/axes and responder outcomes must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between original wording/grade, parent score/axes and responder outcomes to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.4 question-clarification principles; detailed separation rules are custom design; M03 §3.2.4, M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; question-specific outcome adaptation is custom design; M04 §4.5, §4.6.3; limits on current material conversion reflect the review scope and custom design
- Related sources: S01

### N02 · Population, obesity and comorbidities

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The population comprised 351 people aged 21–65 at US community health centers, with obesity and at least one of hypertension, diabetes or hyperlipidemia. Results are not extended to other age or health groups.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Obesity/condition definitions, detailed recruitment/exclusions, baseline weight, distribution of conditions and baseline balance remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Obesity/condition definitions, detailed recruitment/exclusions, baseline weight, distribution of conditions and baseline balance remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Actual eligibility, recruitment, baseline weight/conditions and applicable population
- Materials to obtain first: Eligibility, recruitment and baseline-characteristics tables
- Further research: Proposed follow-up comparative research specifying population conditions; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed in this production.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for actual eligibility, recruitment, baseline weight/conditions and applicable population must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing actual eligibility, recruitment, baseline weight/conditions and applicable population to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.1; Detailed population conditions are Chamgap design; M03 §3.2.1–3.2.4; Dose, duration and effect-modifier details are Chamgap design
- Related sources: S01

### N03 · Attribution within multicomponent Track

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The intervention was Track combining an app, a cellular smart scale, 18 dietitian calls and clinician counseling. Which component produced the mean effect cannot be separated.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Independent component effects, designs separating components and their relative contributions remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Independent component effects, designs separating components and their relative contributions remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between the bundled program and effects of individual components
- Materials to obtain first: Full intervention manual and component-specific delivery/use records
- Further research: A proposed follow-up comparison distinguishing attribution to a bundle, single components and combinations; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between the bundled program and effects of individual components must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between the bundled program and effects of individual components to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; Reverse-direction labels and assessment adaptation are Chamgap design; M03 §3.2.3 and M08 §8.2.2–8.2.3; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N04 · App and algorithm roles

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The original record states that app-based goal self-monitoring and algorithm-tailored feedback were included in the bundle. This is not converted into an effect of a stand-alone app or all digital products.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. App version/algorithm, delivery/access, usage, changes and individual effects remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: App version/algorithm, delivery/access, usage, changes and individual effects remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Actual study identity of app-based goal self-monitoring and tailored feedback
- Materials to obtain first: Research descriptions and delivery/use records for the app and feedback
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study distinguishing the app component from counseling and other elements; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for actual study identity of app-based goal self-monitoring and tailored feedback must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing actual study identity of app-based goal self-monitoring and tailored feedback to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; Reverse-direction labels and assessment adaptation are Chamgap design; M03 §3.2.3 and M08 §8.2.2–8.2.3; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N05 · Smart-scale self-monitoring

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Daily cellular smart-scale weighing was a self-monitoring element of the research intervention. The primary outcome used separate standardized weight measurement at research visits. No new measurement or management instructions are created.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Device/connectivity, actual use, missing records and correspondence between original data and visit measurements remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Device/connectivity, actual use, missing records and correspondence between original data and visit measurements remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between the connected scale’s intervention role and outcome measurement
- Materials to obtain first: Intervention-scale records, visit-measurement protocol and data correspondence
- Further research: A proposed study reporting intervention self-monitoring separately from endpoint measurement; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between the connected scale’s intervention role and outcome measurement must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between the connected scale’s intervention role and outcome measurement to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; reverse-direction labeling and test adaptation are custom design; M03 §3.2.4, M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; question-specific outcome adaptation is custom design; M08 Table 8.2.a, M03 §3.2.4; custom application
- Related sources: S01

### N06 · 18 dietitian calls

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: 18 dietitian calls were included in the bundled intervention. The planned number is not converted into actual completion by every participant or an effect of counseling alone.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Delivery/use of each call, counseling intensity, missed calls, providers and other contacts remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Delivery/use of each call, counseling intensity, missed calls, providers and other contacts remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between counseling plans, actual delivery/use and other contacts
- Materials to obtain first: Telephone-counseling delivery/completion and contact records
- Further research: A proposed study distinguishing counseling delivery, actual use and component attribution; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between counseling plans, actual delivery/use and other contacts must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between counseling plans, actual delivery/use and other contacts to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; Reverse-direction labels and assessment adaptation are Chamgap design; M03 §3.2.3 and M08 §8.2.2–8.2.3; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N07 · Clinician counseling and record integration

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Clinician counseling based on electronic-record recommendations was also included. The original interpretation of technology as an adjunct to counseling is retained; no guidance replacing clinical care or treatment is created.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Actual counseling/contact, decisions, concurrent condition/medication management and differences between groups remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Actual counseling/contact, decisions, concurrent condition/medication management and differences between groups remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Research scope of electronic-record recommendations, clinician counseling and concurrent management
- Materials to obtain first: Clinical integration, counseling and concurrent-management records
- Further research: A proposed study distinguishing attribution to clinical integration and other elements; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for research scope of electronic-record recommendations, clinician counseling and concurrent management must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing research scope of electronic-record recommendations, clinician counseling and concurrent management to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; Reverse-direction labels and assessment adaptation are Chamgap design; M03 §3.2.3 and M08 §8.2.2–8.2.3; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N08 · Usual-care comparison conditions

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The original allocation of 176 intervention participants versus 175 receiving usual care is preserved. Usual care is not changed into a group with no management or contact.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Usual-care content, additional control-group support/exposure, crossover use and contact differences remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Usual-care content, additional control-group support/exposure, crossover use and contact differences remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Actual usual-care management/contact and differences between intervention and control
- Materials to obtain first: Usual-care description and contact/concurrent-exposure records
- Further research: A proposed follow-up trial clearly disclosing actual comparison conditions; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for actual usual-care management/contact and differences between intervention and control must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing actual usual-care management/contact and differences between intervention and control to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; Reverse-direction labels and assessment adaptation are Chamgap design; M03 §3.2.3 and M08 §8.2.2–8.2.3; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N09 · 12-month time point and actual exposure

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The primary endpoint was weight change at 12 months. Planned intervention components are not equated with actual use, and no effects of continuation or discontinuation beyond 12 months are generated.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Visit windows, actual exposure duration for each component, follow-up beyond 12 months and changes in use remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Visit windows, actual exposure duration for each component, follow-up beyond 12 months and changes in use remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between final 12-month analysis and intervention duration/use
- Materials to obtain first: Visit schedule, component-specific delivery/use and long-term follow-up data
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study distinguishing the final time point from continuation/discontinuation follow-up; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between final 12-month analysis and intervention duration/use must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between final 12-month analysis and intervention duration/use to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.4 and M15 §§15.3.1–15.3.3; question-specific outcome adaptation is Chamgap-designed; M03 §3.2.3 and M08 §§8.2.2–8.2.3; Chamgap adaptation; M03 §§3.2.1–3.2.4; dose, durability and effect-modification details are Chamgap-designed
- Related sources: S01

### N10 · Random sequence and allocation concealment

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The manuscript records that a statistician generated the random sequence and concealed it from study staff until assignment. This is a historical procedure narrative in the preserved summary, not current original-source review or certification.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Allocation records, implementation, exceptions and correspondence with the original protocol/registration remain unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Allocation records, implementation, exceptions and correspondence with the original protocol/registration remain unread.
- Required materials and conditions: Original allocation-procedure narrative and scope of actual source verification
- Materials to obtain first: Original allocation/concealment text, protocol and baseline tables
- Further research: Proposed follow-up trial disclosing allocation procedures; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed in this production.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for original allocation-procedure narrative and scope of actual source verification must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing original allocation-procedure narrative and scope of actual source verification to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 §8.1–8.2.3; internal application; M04 §4.5–4.6 collection/selection principles; access/reading separation and hyperlink specifications are internally designed
- Related sources: S01

### N11 · Masked outcome assessors and unmasked participants

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The manuscript records that outcome-measurement staff were masked to allocation, while participants could not be masked because of the intervention. The historical B0 narrative is not used as current verification of all masking.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Original data on assessor/analyst roles, maintenance/breaking of masking and expectation effects remain unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Original data on assessor/analyst roles, maintenance/breaking of masking and expectation effects remain unread.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between assessor masking and intervention characteristics
- Materials to obtain first: Masking roles, measurement procedures and original materials
- Further research: A proposed study distinguishing assessor masking from participant expectation effects; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between assessor masking and intervention characteristics must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between assessor masking and intervention characteristics to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 Table 8.2.a, M03 §3.2.4; CHAMGAP adaptation; Material collection/selection principles in M04 §4.5–4.6; Separating access from reading and defining hyperlink behavior are designed by CHAMGAP
- Related sources: S01

### N12 · Standardized measurements and weight-change definition

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The primary endpoint was standardized measured weight change at research visits at 12 months. App entries, self-reports and daily smart-scale logs are not used as the same endpoint.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Details of baseline/visit measurements, equipment/calibration, conditions, measurement windows and handling of repeats remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Details of baseline/visit measurements, equipment/calibration, conditions, measurement windows and handling of repeats remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Visit measurements, change from baseline, units and measurement windows
- Materials to obtain first: Standardized weight measurement, baseline/visit tables and calculation definitions
- Further research: A proposed study reporting measured outcomes separately from remote self-monitoring; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for visit measurements, change from baseline, units and measurement windows must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing visit measurements, change from baseline, units and measurement windows to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.4, M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; question-specific outcome adaptations are internally designed; M08 Table 8.2.a, M03 §3.2.4; internal application; M08 §8.2.2, M15 §15.3.1; internal application
- Related sources: S01

### N13 · Group-specific mean changes and CIs

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Original values are preserved: intervention −4.0 kg (95% CI −4.9 to −3.0) and usual care −0.1 kg (−1.0 to 0.8). Rounded group values are not newly subtracted or converted into final absolute weights.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Group-specific baseline/final absolute values, model/adjustment details for each estimate and individual distributions remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Group-specific baseline/final absolute values, model/adjustment details for each estimate and individual distributions remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Separate estimands for changes within each group and the between-group effect
- Materials to obtain first: Original group values, change estimates and model descriptions
- Further research: A proposed study reporting group changes and the between-group estimate distinctly together; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for separate estimands for changes within each group and the between-group effect must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing separate estimands for changes within each group and the between-group effect to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.4, M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; question-specific outcome adaptations are Chamgap's own design; M08 §8.2.2, M15 §15.3.1; Chamgap's own application; M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; Chamgap's own application
- Related sources: S01

### N14 · Between-group difference of −3.8 kg

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The between-group difference was −3.8 kg (95% CI −5.0 to −2.5), P<0.001. The original estimate is preserved; no new difference/CI, standardized effect or relative weight-loss rate is calculated.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Exact model terms, adjustment/baseline correspondence and data for reproducing estimates remain unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Exact model terms, adjustment/baseline correspondence and data for reproducing estimates remain unread.
- Required materials and conditions: Exact original 12-month between-group difference, CI and P value
- Materials to obtain first: Original between-group contrast, model and CI results
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study disclosing the primary effect estimate and uncertainty; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for exact original 12-month between-group difference, CI and P value must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing exact original 12-month between-group difference, CI and P value to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 §8.2.2, M15 §15.3.1; Chamgap application; M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; Chamgap application; M08 Table 8.2.a, M15 §15.3, M19 §19.1.2–19.2.4; design-specific adaptations are Chamgap's own design
- Related sources: S01

### N15 · Mean, individual response and the 5% threshold

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: At least 5% weight loss, 40% versus 17% with P<0.001, was a separate secondary responder result. Threshold attainment or event counts are not calculated from mean values of −4.0/−0.1 or −3.8 kg.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Individual baseline/change distributions, threshold calculation, responder denominators/event counts and CIs remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Individual baseline/change distributions, threshold calculation, responder denominators/event counts and CIs remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between continuous mean change and the secondary responder endpoint
- Materials to obtain first: Responder definitions, denominators/events and individual-result data
- Further research: A proposed follow-up trial distinguishing mean and prespecified responder outcomes; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between continuous mean change and the secondary responder endpoint must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between continuous mean change and the secondary responder endpoint to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.4, M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; question-specific outcome adaptation is custom design; M08 Table 8.2.a, M04 §4.6.3; custom application; M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; custom application
- Related sources: S01

### N16 · 351 participants, 176/175 and denominators

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: 351 randomized participants (176/175) are preserved as recorded. Enrollment is not used to imply measurement of every participant at 12 months or the observed denominator for every analysis.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. 12-month measurement, model-analysis, group-specific visit/response denominators and analysis-inclusion criteria remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: 12-month measurement, model-analysis, group-specific visit/response denominators and analysis-inclusion criteria remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Randomized population and endpoint-specific analysis/measurement denominators
- Materials to obtain first: Participant flow and visit-specific measured/analysis denominators
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study distinguishing randomized, observed and estimated denominators; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for randomized population and endpoint-specific analysis/measurement denominators must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing randomized population and endpoint-specific analysis/measurement denominators to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 Table 8.2.a, M15 §15.3 and M19 §19.1.2–19.2.4; Design-specific adaptation is Chamgap design; M08 §8.2.2 and M15 §15.3.1; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N17 · ITT principle and estimand population

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The manuscript records following the ITT principle. This historical narrative is not used to establish analysis-population details, completeness of all observations or current content-review verification.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Primary-effect inclusion criteria, estimand-population definitions, analysis exceptions and original PPS/sensitivity results remain unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Primary-effect inclusion criteria, estimand-population definitions, analysis exceptions and original PPS/sensitivity results remain unread.
- Required materials and conditions: ITT narrative and outcome-specific analysis conditions
- Materials to obtain first: Original ITT definition, inclusion/exclusion, model and sensitivity materials
- Further research: A proposed study disclosing ITT separately from other analyses; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for iTT narrative and outcome-specific analysis conditions must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing iTT narrative and outcome-specific analysis conditions to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 §8.2.2, M15 §15.3.1; internal application; M04 §4.5–4.6 collection/selection principles; access/reading separation and hyperlink specifications are internally designed
- Related sources: S01

### N18 · Missing data and maximum-likelihood model

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The manuscript records that missing observations were estimated by maximum likelihood in the prespecified model. This is not changed into measurement of all participants or absence of missing-data effects.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Group-specific reasons/timing of missingness/attrition, model terms/assumptions, sensitivity to non-random missingness and actual numbers remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Group-specific reasons/timing of missingness/attrition, model terms/assumptions, sensitivity to non-random missingness and actual numbers remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between missing-data narratives, missingness/attrition and model assumptions
- Materials to obtain first: Flow, missing-data handling and model-assumption/sensitivity materials
- Further research: A proposed study distinguishing observations from estimates when reporting missing-data effects; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between missing-data narratives, missingness/attrition and model assumptions must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between missing-data narratives, missingness/attrition and model assumptions to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 Table 8.2.a, M15 §15.3 and M19 §19.1.2–19.2.4; Design-specific adaptation is Chamgap design; M08 §8.2.2 and M15 §15.3.1; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N19 · Registration and prespecified primary endpoint

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Original records of NCT01827800, posting on 2013-04-10 and allocation starting on 2013-06-18 are preserved. The narrative that these matched the primary 12-month weight-change endpoint is historical; full registration/plans remain unread in this work.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Registration changes, protocol/SAP, the complete pre-recruitment analysis conditions and original-source correspondence remain unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Registration changes, protocol/SAP, the complete pre-recruitment analysis conditions and original-source correspondence remain unread.
- Required materials and conditions: Preserved scope of the NCT identifier, advance dates and endpoint plan
- Materials to obtain first: Registration history, protocol, and SAP
- Further research: A proposed study openly linking advance plans and actual primary analysis; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for preserved scope of the NCT identifier, advance dates and endpoint plan must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing preserved scope of the NCT identifier, advance dates and endpoint plan to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 Table 8.2.a, M04 §4.6.3; custom application; M04 §4.5–4.6 material-collection/selection principles; separation of access/reading and hyperlink conventions are custom design; M04 §4.5, §4.6.3; limits on current material conversion reflect the review scope and custom design
- Related sources: S01

### N20 · Multiple outcomes, time points and hierarchy

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The manuscript’s primary mean weight endpoint at 12 months is distinguished from the secondary 5% responder result. Reductions in blood pressure, glucose or disease events, or primary effects at other time points, are not generated.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. The complete outcomes/time points, multiplicity adjustment, analysis/reporting changes and secondary-result tables remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: The complete outcomes/time points, multiplicity adjustment, analysis/reporting changes and secondary-result tables remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Advance hierarchy of the primary mean endpoint, responders and other outcomes
- Materials to obtain first: SAP, complete results and hierarchy/multiplicity materials
- Further research: A proposed study distinguishing the primary endpoint from secondary results; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for advance hierarchy of the primary mean endpoint, responders and other outcomes must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing advance hierarchy of the primary mean endpoint, responders and other outcomes to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M08 Table 8.2.a, M04 §4.6.3; custom application; M03 §3.2.4, M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; question-specific outcome adaptation is custom design; M03 §3.2.4; custom extension boundary
- Related sources: S01

### N21 · Concurrent management, medication and lifestyle

Verification status: Unverified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: This was a bundled study involving comorbidities and clinician counseling. It does not establish that concurrent management, medication or lifestyle beyond the app, scale and counseling were equal or had no effect.
- Why unverified: Information currently needed is unverified in the preserved summary. Details of concurrent management/medication changes, diet/activity, group-specific exposure and handling of differences remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Details of concurrent management/medication changes, diet/activity, group-specific exposure and handling of differences remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Group-specific effects of conditions/medication, diet/activity and clinical contact
- Materials to obtain first: Concurrent-exposure, condition/medication and lifestyle records and analyses
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study distinguishing concurrent management from intervention components; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for group-specific effects of conditions/medication, diet/activity and clinical contact must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing group-specific effects of conditions/medication, diet/activity and clinical contact to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.3, M08 §8.2.2–8.2.3; own application; M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; reverse-direction labels and test adaptations are our own design
- Related sources: S01

### N22 · Weight, clinical events and importance

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The original verdict distinguishes weight from actual events such as disease onset or death. The manuscript’s statement that no prespecified success threshold or externally validated minimum clinically important difference was declared is preserved.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Declared clinical-importance/success criteria, disease events and long-term functional effects remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Declared clinical-importance/success criteria, disease events and long-term functional effects remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between weight change, clinical events and success/importance criteria
- Materials to obtain first: Prespecified importance criteria and clinical-outcome/follow-up materials
- Further research: A proposed study distinguishing weight from clinical outcomes important to patients; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between weight change, clinical events and success/importance criteria must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between weight change, clinical events and success/importance criteria to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; Chamgap's own application; M03 §3.2.4; Chamgap's own limits on extension
- Related sources: S01

### N23 · NIH public funding

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: NIH NIDDK support through R01DK093829 is preserved as recorded. Public funding is not converted into absence of all support/author relationships or new independence certification.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Funder roles, agreements, data/publication decisions and complete original support statements remain unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Funder roles, agreements, data/publication decisions and complete original support statements remain unread.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between actual funder/grant and other support categories
- Materials to obtain first: Original funding disclosures, support roles and agreements
- Further research: A proposed follow-up trial disclosing support roles; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between actual funder/grant and other support categories must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between actual funder/grant and other support categories to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: Chamgap's own conditions for independence and attribution. The official methodological sections used in this example do not validate every detail of these items.
- Related sources: S01

### N24 · Commercial, scale, analysis/writing/publication support

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The manuscript states that the pivotal paper did not report commercial sponsorship, donated scales, outsourced analysis, medical writing or publication-fee support. Non-reporting is not judged as actual absence.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Each support category, actual agreements, complete originals and research roles remain unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Each support category, actual agreements, complete originals and research roles remain unread.
- Required materials and conditions: Scope of category-specific non-reporting in the pivotal paper
- Materials to obtain first: Disclosures of commercial/in-kind, outsourced-analysis and writing/publication support
- Further research: A proposed study disclosing support categories separately; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for scope of category-specific non-reporting in the pivotal paper must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing scope of category-specific non-reporting in the pivotal paper to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: Chamgap independence/attribution conditions. The referenced official method sections do not certify every detail of these items; Data collection/selection principles in M04 §4.5–4.6; Access/reading separation and hyperlink rules are Chamgap design
- Related sources: S01

### N25 · Later author relationships and historical attribution

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The manuscript records a later paper disclosing Gary Bennett’s WW scientific-adviser role and equity in Coeus Health. A later disclosure after the pivotal trial is not applied retrospectively as confirmation of funding or roles during that trial.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Specific later bibliography/disclosure dates, contemporaneous agreements, relationships during the original trial and complete COI remain unlinked/unread. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Specific later bibliography/disclosure dates, contemporaneous agreements, relationships during the original trial and complete COI remain unlinked/unread.
- Required materials and conditions: Timing, individuals and relation of later disclosures to the original trial
- Materials to obtain first: Later original disclosures, dates and materials relating them to original-trial COI
- Further research: A proposed study reporting support and author relationships separately by period; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for timing, individuals and relation of later disclosures to the original trial must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing timing, individuals and relation of later disclosures to the original trial to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: Chamgap’s custom independence/attribution conditions. The official methodology sections used in this pilot do not guarantee all these detailed items; M04 §4.5, §4.6.3; current conversion limits reflect review scope and custom design; M04 §4.6.1–4.6.2 distinction between studies and reports; cohort/outcome linkage is custom application
- Related sources: S01

### N26 · Other low-intensity null trials and applicability differences

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Null trials of app-only or low-intensity technology support are mentioned, but the original explanation treats them as generalization limits rather than direct refutations of Track because composition and intensity differ. Unlinked reports are not created as new trials.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Specific bibliography, population/intervention/denominators, endpoints and results of the other trials are not linked. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Specific bibliography, population/intervention/denominators, endpoints and results of the other trials are not linked.
- Required materials and conditions: Distinction between references to null programs and direct Track comparisons
- Materials to obtain first: Comparison-program originals and relationships in composition/intensity/endpoints
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study matching composition and intensity for comparison; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for distinction between references to null programs and direct Track comparisons must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing distinction between references to null programs and direct Track comparisons to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M04 §4.6.3, M15 §15.3.1–15.3.3; status separation is custom design; M04 §4.6.1–4.6.2 distinction between studies and reports; cohort/outcome linkage is custom application; M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; reverse-direction labeling and test adaptation are custom design
- Related sources: S01

### N27 · Same report, sibling sheets and independent replication

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The mean and 5% sheets share the same Bennett2018 Track report of 351 randomized participants. Groups, time points, app/counseling components, bibliography/registration and sibling sheets are not added as new independent trials or participants.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Independent reproduction with the same composition/endpoint and unique trial/participant totals are not established. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Independent reproduction with the same composition/endpoint and unique trial/participant totals are not established.
- Required materials and conditions: Report-to-trial-to-group/time-point/denominator relationships
- Materials to obtain first: Report/cohort relationships and originals of separate independent studies
- Further research: A proposed independent follow-up comparison of the same bundle/endpoint; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for report-to-trial-to-group/time-point/denominator relationships must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing report-to-trial-to-group/time-point/denominator relationships to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: Study/report distinction in M04 §4.6.1–4.6.2; Cohort/outcome linkage is Chamgap application; M04 §4.6.1–4.6.2 and M15 §15.3.1; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N28 · Persistence and generalization across products/populations

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Results are limited to the population and duration of the Track bundle including counseling. They are not extended to all apps/commercial products, other populations, persistence beyond 12 months or disease-treatment effects.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Long-term/discontinuation follow-up, other populations/compositions and direct single-component comparisons remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Long-term/discontinuation follow-up, other populations/compositions and direct single-component comparisons remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: 12-month bundle results versus later effects or other programs
- Materials to obtain first: Long-term follow-up and direct trials by population/composition
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study distinguishing applicability by bundle, population and duration; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for 12-month bundle results versus later effects or other programs must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing 12-month bundle results versus later effects or other programs to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M03 §3.2.1–3.2.4; dose/duration/effect-modification details are internally designed; M03 §3.2.2–3.2.3; reverse-direction labels and testing adaptations are internally designed; M03 §3.2.4; internal extension boundaries
- Related sources: S01

### N29 · Original safety record and reporting gaps

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Parent safety is unknown, and the manuscript states that the pivotal paper did not systematically present adverse events as a prespecified safety endpoint. Mean weight loss is not used as absence of harm or safety of disease management.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Adverse-event collection/adjudication, group-specific frequencies/denominators, discontinuation and long-term/vulnerable-population harms remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Adverse-event collection/adjudication, group-specific frequencies/denominators, discontinuation and long-term/vulnerable-population harms remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Prespecification, collection and group-specific denominators/follow-up for adverse events
- Materials to obtain first: Safety plans, adverse-event tables and discontinuation/long-term follow-up
- Further research: A proposed study specifying harm collection and population-specific follow-up; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for prespecification, collection and group-specific denominators/follow-up for adverse events must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing prespecification, collection and group-specific denominators/follow-up for adverse events to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Supplements safety-data gaps for the selected subclaim. Mean weight, 5% responder results and parent caution wording are not used to judge safety or generate harm incidence or new use instructions.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M19 §19.1.2–19.2.4; detailed distinctions are Chamgap’s own design; M19 §19.1.2–19.2.4; Chamgap application; M19 §19.1.2–19.2.4; Chamgap application; M19 §19.1.2–19.2.4; Chamgap application
- Related sources: S01

### N30 · Parent/subclaim, Korean/English, dates and history

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: Parent C56, B/S/R1/I2/E+/B0, unrecorded precision, three false flags, empty override reasons and subclaim grade C/note are preserved. Korean/English text, 2026-08-26, empty corrections/deliberation and historical cross-checking are not current review or a subclaim score.
- Why unverified: Only relevant preserved-summary information is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. Missing subclaim score/status/axes are not filled with parent values. No new efficacy/method certification. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: Missing subclaim score/status/axes are not filled with parent values. No new efficacy/method certification.
- Required materials and conditions: Separation of original values/axes from corrections and historical verification narratives
- Materials to obtain first: Original corrections, versions and user correction comments
- Further research: A proposed study distinguishing original values/history from the applicability of later updates; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for separation of original values/axes from corrections and historical verification narratives must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing separation of original values/axes from corrections and historical verification narratives to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M04 §4.5, §4.6.3; limits of this material conversion follow the review scope and internal design; M03 §3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.4 question-clarification principles; detailed separation rules are internally designed
- Related sources: S01

### N31 · Actual summary reading and external links

Verification status: Partly verified  
Reading scope: Summary read; external material unread

- Current findings: The full preserved JSON summary and bibliography were used for production, and links are retained. Papers, registration, protocol, SAP and original later disclosures/support materials remain unread with no access attempt; links were not tested.
- Why unverified: Only the relevant information in the preserved summary is recorded; detailed originals remain unread and existing content review incomplete. External-source contents, exact denominators/models and actual accessibility remain unverified. Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Reason for missing information: External-source contents, exact denominators/models and actual accessibility remain unverified.
- Required materials and conditions: Reading the preserved JSON versus access to external originals, registration, plans and COI
- Materials to obtain first: Originals, registration, protocol, SAP, support/COI materials or user comments
- Further research: A proposed follow-up study updating acquisition, timing and scope separately; no new investigation, calculation or trial was performed.
- Conditions for verification: Corresponding original materials and analysis scope for reading the preserved JSON versus access to external originals, registration, plans and COI must be available and unverified matters distinguishable. Preserved wording is linked here; existing content review remains incomplete.
- Why this condition is needed: An applied item distinguishing reading the preserved JSON versus access to external originals, registration, plans and COI to connect the selected question’s needed materials with current materials.
- Application exceptions: Limited to the preserved summary’s selected strategy/population/endpoint/period. It does not replace numbers for other strategies/trials/endpoints or unread external materials.
- Remaining uncertainty: This record links preserved-summary statements; it does not establish external-paper comparison, a new efficacy verdict or completed content review.
- Referenced methods: M04 §4.5–4.6 material collection/selection principles; acquisition/reading separation and hyperlink specifications are internally designed; M04 §4.5, §4.6.3; limits of this material conversion follow the review scope and internal design
- Related sources: S01

## Evidence and sources

### S01

Bennett GG et al. 2018 Track

[PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30361140/)

Materials actually read: Summary read; external material unread  
Findings recorded in the summary: −4.0 kg versus −0.1 kg; between-group difference −3.8 kg (95% CI −5.0 to −2.5), P<0.001. At least 5% weight loss was 40% versus 17%, P<0.001, but this was a secondary responder criterion rather than the primary endpoint. Null trials of app-only or low-intensity technology support are also noted; this result is limited to the Track bundle including counseling.  
Record level: Outcome wording in the stored summary  
Independent replication: S01 Bennett2018 Track is one 12-month parallel report comparing bundled Track with usual care in 351 adults (176/175) aged 21–65 with obesity and at least one of hypertension/diabetes/hyperlipidemia at US community health centers. Individual effects of the app, cellular smart scale, 18 dietitian calls and clinician counseling cannot be separated. The two sheets share the same people/report. Standardized research-visit mean changes of −4.0 kg (95% CI −4.9 to −3.0) versus −0.1 kg (−1.0 to 0.8), and between-group difference −3.8 kg (−5.0 to −2.5), P<0.001, are primary continuous results. At least 5% weight loss, 40% versus 17%, P<0.001, is a secondary responder result; proportions or event counts are not calculated from means. Registration, ITT/maximum likelihood, public funding and later author disclosures are preserved historical narratives, not current external reading/content review. Specific bibliographies for other low-intensity null trials and later disclosures are unlinked, so no new report is created. Groups, time points, thresholds, bibliography/registration and sibling sheets are not added as new independent trials or participants; report-item counts are not unique clinical totals.

| Material | Public availability | Access status | Actually read | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stored summary | Stored file | Stored summary | Summary read | Only stored-summary and bibliographic content was used for production. External material verification/review is not complete. |
| External paper | Public availability unverified; only bibliography links preserved | Unread; access not attempted | Not read | No external access or click testing was performed in the original preparation. URLs or registration identifiers alone do not upgrade acquisition/reading status. |
| Registration material | Public availability unverified; only bibliography links preserved | Unread; access not attempted | Not read | No external access or click testing was performed in the original preparation. URLs or registration identifiers alone do not upgrade acquisition/reading status. |
| Protocol | Public availability unverified; only bibliography links preserved | Unread; access not attempted | Not read | No external access or click testing was performed in the original preparation. URLs or registration identifiers alone do not upgrade acquisition/reading status. |
| Statistical analysis plan | Public availability unverified; only bibliography links preserved | Unread; access not attempted | Not read | No external access or click testing was performed in the original preparation. URLs or registration identifiers alone do not upgrade acquisition/reading status. |
| Funding, product-support and COI material | Public availability unverified; only bibliography links preserved | Unread; access not attempted | Not read | No external access or click testing was performed in the original preparation. URLs or registration identifiers alone do not upgrade acquisition/reading status. |

## Review criteria and methods

These are Chamgap's own application conditions, informed by the relevant sections of official methodological guidance. They do not constitute official assessment-tool certification or a new efficacy score.

- M03 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-03) · §3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.3, MECIR C5/C7/C13 · Clearly record the question, eligibility conditions and reasons for changes, and distinguish variations in interventions. · Preserved method HTML copies; no current method-content re-review or official tool execution
- M04 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5.1 (2025), chapter updated 2025-03](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-04) · §4.5, §4.6.1–4.6.3, MECIR C42 · Distinguish studies from reports and link them; do not omit a study solely because results are unreported. · Preserved method HTML copies; no current method-content re-review or official tool execution
- M08 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-08) · §8.1–8.2.3, Table 8.2.a · Define the outcome and effect of interest, then examine randomization, deviations, missing data, measurement and selective reporting. · Preserved method HTML copies; no current method-content re-review or official tool execution
- M15 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-15) · §15.2.4, §15.3.1–15.3.3 · Distinguish effect estimates, intervals, importance and applicability. Sample size alone does not determine precision. · Preserved method HTML copies; no current method-content re-review or official tool execution
- M19 [Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2019-10](https://www.cochrane.org/authors/handbooks-and-manuals/handbook/current/chapter-19) · §19.1.2, §19.2.1–19.2.4 · Harm questions may require different designs, populations and follow-up from efficacy questions. Case reports do not establish incidence rates. · Preserved method HTML copies; no current method-content re-review or official tool execution

## What the statuses mean

- Met: Status for necessary evidence confirmed after existing content review. No completion is declared in the current presentation.
- Partly verified: Some information in the stored summary is linked into the table. External comparison/content review is not complete.
- Unverified: The article leaves this unverified, or required material is absent from the current stored summary. This is distinct from zero, absence or safety.
- Review incomplete: Existing content review remains incomplete.
- Not reported: Not reported within the stored material actually read; not extended to the entire primary paper.
- Inaccessible: Means an actual access failure. Access not attempted here is not assigned this state.
- Not applicable: Not used as a substitute for an evidence gap.
- Conflicting data: Requires an observed disagreement under the same comparison criteria; not automatically judged in this production.
- Insufficient evidence for the conditions: Marks a gap in additional material required by the selected conditions; not a new efficacy grade.

## Change history

2026-10-14 · Public page/materials 1.0. A public view and materials were prepared from the existing31 items. No new clinical search, verification-status change or scoring was performed.