| 1 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N01 · Evidence conditionWhat is the original conclusion for the selected 50% responder question?Required |
The selection is at least a 50% reduction in migraine attacks, with original subclaim D. The relevant effect concerns the proportion reaching that threshold; the original conclusion of no significant difference from placebo is retained. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Comparison of responder proportions against placebo |
Material needed: Responder definitions, baseline periods, measurement windows, arm-specific responders, denominators, effects and CIs are needed. No new grade or independence claim is created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 2 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N02 · Evidence conditionIs the 50% threshold a reduction in average attacks across the group?Required |
The account says the proportion with at least a 50% reduction in attacks did not differ from placebo. This is not converted into a 50% reduction in the ginger group's mean or a 50% improvement in every person. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between an individual responder threshold and group mean change |
Material needed: Individual baseline and treatment-period measurements, response classification, arm-specific events, denominators and original comparisons are needed. Responder rates and mean changes are not newly calculated. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 3 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N03 · Evidence conditionAre exact arm-specific responders, effects and intervals known?Required |
The original account of no significant between-arm differences in core outcomes and insufficient point estimates or exact CIs in the public abstract is preserved. Arm-specific responders, proportions, direct P, RR, RD and CIs are absent from the stored summary. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Original material for direct between-arm estimates and precision |
Material needed: Original outcome tables, responders, denominators, effects, CIs, statistical models and missing-data handling are needed. Numbers, CIs and P are not invented. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 4 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N04 · Evidence conditionDoes nonsignificance prove the absence of even a small benefit?Required |
The parent account says the direct placebo comparison does not support prevention efficacy, but insufficient CIs and importance boundaries prevent fully excluding a small benefit and assigning F. Parent D30 is not converted into proof of an absolute null effect. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between null findings, precision gaps and exact zero effects |
Material needed: Direct effects, CIs, external clinical importance boundaries, denominators, design and power information are needed. No new F or equivalence judgment or boundary calculation is made. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 5 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N05 · Evidence conditionIs improvement over time in both arms an added ginger effect?Required |
The original explanation that improvement in both arms does not mean ginger outperformed placebo is retained. Within-arm changes in another subclaim do not replace the between-arm effect for the selected responder outcome. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Within-arm change versus the between-arm effect against placebo |
Material needed: Baseline and follow-up data, time and arm comparisons, changes, models, denominators, original estimates and CIs are needed. Within-arm changes are not subtracted to create a new effect. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 6 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N06 · Evidence conditionIs detailed eligibility for adults with episodic migraine known?Required |
The parent scope of 107 adults with episodic migraine is retained. Overall size does not substitute for arm-specific responder denominators or detailed diagnostic and eligibility criteria. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Diagnosis, baseline attack frequency, preventive care and population scope |
Material needed: Diagnostic criteria, baseline frequency, age, concurrent and prior care, exclusions and acute-medication information are needed. Findings are not extended to chronic migraine or other populations. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 7 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N07 · Evidence conditionWhich standardized ginger formulation was compared?Required |
The original comparison of a 200 mg dry extract standardized to 5% active constituents, used 3 times daily for 3 months against placebo, is retained. Total daily or active amounts are not calculated, and culinary ginger is not treated as interchangeable. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Dry extract 200 mg, 5% active constituents and the original schedule |
Material needed: Products, active-constituent definitions, quantification, batches, quality, placebo composition, adherence and original exposure records are needed. New dosing or treatment instructions are not written. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 8 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N08 · Evidence conditionAre 3-month prevention and acute-attack treatment the same question?Required |
The original trial concerns 3-month prevention with ginger alone. Acute-attack treatment or nausea improvement is not transferred into the same 50% prevention responder outcome. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between prevention intent, measurement periods and acute treatment |
Material needed: Baseline observation, treatment and measurement windows, prevention eligibility, concurrent care and direct findings are needed. Acute studies are not added as replication of the same prevention question. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 9 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N09 · Evidence conditionAre feverfew-plus-ginger combinations distinguished from ginger extract alone?Required |
The parent account did not count acute feverfew-plus-ginger combinations as replication of 3-month prevention with ginger alone. Combination findings are not copied as direct efficacy for the selected question. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between acute combinations and single-ingredient prevention |
Material needed: Direct materials on the same standardized single ingredient, population, control and prevention outcome are needed. Combination findings or trial counts absent from the stored account are not created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 10 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N10 · Evidence conditionIs a sumatriptan active-control study replication of placebo-controlled prevention?Required |
The account did not count sumatriptan active-control studies as replication of 3-month prevention with ginger alone. Findings with other controls or durations are not converted into certification of the selected prevention effect or equivalence. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Directness of other controls and acute questions for the selected prevention outcome |
Material needed: Prespecified responder comparisons for the selected formulation, preventive population, duration and placebo control are needed. Active-control values or clinical guidance outside the account are not created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 11 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N11 · Evidence conditionDoes a nausea-related signal establish migraine prevention?Required |
The original boundary against transferring nausea, other symptoms, combination products or acute-treatment evidence to long-term single-ingredient prevention is retained. Mechanisms or nausea materials are not used as direct evidence for the 50% responder outcome. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between other symptoms or mechanisms and direct attack prevention |
Material needed: Direct patient outcomes, between-arm estimates and CIs for the same prevention question are needed. No new mechanistic or efficacy judgment is made. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 12 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N12 · Evidence conditionAre overall trial size and outcome-specific analysis denominators the same?Required |
The original wording of 107 randomized in NCT02570633 and 107 adults is preserved. Arm-specific allocation, completion, responder-analysis counts, missingness and ITT details are absent from the summary and are not treated as complete data for every outcome. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Allocation, completion, responder analysis and missingness handling |
Material needed: Original flow diagrams, arm-specific analysis populations, missingness and withdrawal reasons, diary completeness, missing-responder handling and sensitivity materials are needed. New differences or ratios are not calculated. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 13 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N13 · Evidence conditionAre detailed randomization and double-blinding procedures known?Required |
The original double-blind placebo-controlled randomized design is preserved. Its label does not verify allocation, concealment, sensory matching, masking success, attack-diary collection or analyst details. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Details of allocation, concealment, placebo, measurement and selective reporting |
Material needed: Original methods, withdrawals, missingness, diaries, analysis, outcome selection, registration and plans are needed. No new official risk-of-bias assessment is performed. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 14 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N14 · Evidence conditionIs the registration identifier distinguished from actual reading of the original plan?Required |
NCT02570633 is preserved in the existing evidence, citation and bilingual explanation. Registration, protocols, SAPs and amendment histories are unread in this work; the identifier alone does not establish prespecified agreement on responder criteria, denominators or analyses. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Registration identifier versus prespecified outcomes and analysis hierarchy |
Material needed: Original registration, amendments, protocols, SAPs, the 50% definition, timing, analyses and outcome hierarchy are needed. A registration URL is not newly inferred. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 15 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N15 · Evidence conditionAre severe-pain days, acute medication and duration the same responder outcome?Required |
The account preserves no between-arm difference for severe-pain days, acute analgesic use and attack duration as well. These differ from the 50% responder outcome; original values, timing and CIs are not transferred between them. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between other outcomes or subclaims and the key responder outcome |
Material needed: Outcome-specific definitions, measurement windows, denominators, between-arm effects, CIs, prespecified hierarchies and multiplicity materials are needed. The original null account is retained. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 16 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N16 · Evidence conditionAre concurrent medication, adherence and withdrawal details known?Required |
Acute analgesic use is an original outcome. Medication types, concurrent preventive drugs, changes, extract adherence, rescue care and arm-specific withdrawal details are absent from the stored summary. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Preventive and acute medication, actual exposure and missingness |
Material needed: Arm-specific concurrent and acute medication, medication changes, actual exposure, adherence, withdrawals and missingness materials are needed. Unverified information is not converted into equality or absence. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 17 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N17 · Evidence conditionDo 3-month findings establish post-treatment persistence or long-term harms?Required |
The trial's 3-month prevention condition is retained. Post-treatment attacks, maintained responses, recurrence and long-term or rare harms are unestablished in the account and are not extended into proof of prevention over all longer periods. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between prevention during treatment and post-treatment follow-up |
Material needed: Post-treatment follow-up, continuing or changed care, recurrence, adherence, harms, denominators and direct longer-duration materials are needed. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 18 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N18 · Evidence conditionIs the original sole-direct-trial statement a new certification of independence?Required |
The parent describes a single independent and sole direct prevention trial. The same paper is shared across the parent and subclaims; this is not newly certified as independent replication or an established unique-trial total. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between shared original reports or cohorts and independent replication |
Material needed: Registration, institutions, recruitment, participants, report relationships, overlap and support materials are needed. Unique trial and participant totals remain unverified. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 19 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N19 · Evidence conditionIs historical full-text support checking distinguished from current reading?Required |
Original manufacturer-independence and full-text support-checking wording is preserved in both Korean and English. This historical record is not promoted into completed full-text reading or independence verification in this work. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Historical funding wording and original company-involvement materials |
Material needed: Original material linking financial and product support, author or company affiliations and design, analysis and publication roles is needed. Historical checking wording is not relabeled as a current check. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 20 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N20 · Evidence conditionAre actual harm-event counts and denominators known?Supplementary |
The parent's cautions on heartburn, abdominal discomfort, anticoagulants, antiplatelet drugs, bleeding risks and surgery are preserved. Arm-specific harm counts, exposure, collection, withdrawal reasons and denominators are absent from the stored summary. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Harm collection, exposure, withdrawal and bleeding-related concurrent-medication context |
Material needed: Harm definitions, collection, events, affected participants, severity, timing, exposure, denominators, concurrent medication, vulnerable groups and long-term materials are needed. No new treatment or dosing guidance is written. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 21 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N21 · Evidence conditionIs the 50% threshold the same as between-arm clinical importance?Required |
The original 50% threshold classifies responders. Gaps in exact CIs and clinical importance boundaries are retained; the threshold alone does not certify an important between-arm benefit or external validation. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Responder classification, prespecification and external benefit boundaries |
Material needed: Threshold sources, prespecified definitions, patient-importance boundaries, direct effects, CIs and arm-specific denominators are needed. Absolute benefits, NNTs, intervals and boundaries are not newly calculated. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 22 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N22 · Evidence conditionAre null core between-arm findings replaced by other results?Required |
The parent centers the 50% responder outcome and core between-arm comparisons while distinguishing within-arm changes, acute combinations and active controls. Original null findings are not replaced with signals from other symptoms or studies. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between core comparisons, within-arm changes and outcome hierarchy |
Material needed: Complete original findings, denominators, prespecified hierarchies, analyses, missingness and timing materials are needed. Unread original tables are not described as fully reviewed. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 23 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N23 · Evidence conditionAre the original subclaim grade and parent score or axes distinguished?Required |
The original subclaim grade is D, with no individual score, status or axes. Parent D30, Caution and judgment axes remain separate contexts and do not fill absent subclaim values. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Subclaim D and absent individual score, status and axes |
Material needed: Parent and subclaim questions and application scope need review. No new grades, scores, clinical statuses or independent certification are created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 24 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N24 · Evidence conditionAre stored summaries distinguished from actual external-material reading?Required |
The complete stored parent summary was read for production. Historical checking, cross-checking, full-text and calculation wording remains historical; external abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAPs are unread in this work. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Reading states for summaries, abstracts, full texts, registration and plans |
Material needed: External acquisition, actual reading and content review are separate events. A link alone does not establish original reading, accessibility or completed review. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 25 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N25 · Evidence conditionAre bilingual representative descriptions applied to every report and outcome?Required |
The complete parent Korean and English accounts and representative classifications are preserved. Representative doses, populations and outcomes are not automatically applied as quantitative exposure, denominators or identical findings across all arms and outcomes. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Scope of original language, formulations, populations and representative outcomes |
Material needed: Report-specific populations, formulations, controls, outcomes, timing and denominators need comparison materials. No new external English-original comparison or correction review was performed. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 26 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N26 · Evidence conditionAre the original evidence date, corrections and production records distinguished?Required |
The original evidence date of 2026-09-07 and empty correction and deliberation records are retained. Production time is not converted into a new evidence-verification date, and nonexistent corrections are not created. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Original evidence date and empty correction or deliberation records |
Material needed: Additional materials, revised conditions, applied observations and judgment changes are separate events. Complete originals and reasons for changes must be preserved and linked to the required review. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 27 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N27 · Evidence conditionAre report and material counts used as unique trials or quality scores?Required |
Report links, stored summaries and needed external-material entries form the table's structure. They are not acquired external papers, unique participants, trials, independent replications or quality scores; shared original reports are not double counted. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between preservation structure, unique clinical units and reading |
Material needed: Original trial, report and cohort links and actual material-reading records are needed. Unique trial and participant totals remain unverified. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 28 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N28 · Evidence conditionHow are new materials or corrections linked?Required |
Originals and current conditions and observations are preserved. New materials need linking to the relevant comparisons, denominators, outcomes, reports and subclaims; this production is not a new clinical search or revised judgment. |
This information was transferred from the stored summary with the selected question distinguished from parent materials. Detailed originals and review of existing content remain incomplete; it does not establish clinical certification or review approval. |
Distinction between condition revisions, material updates and judgment changes |
Material needed: Complete prior originals, events, versions, reasons for changes and the required review must be recorded. New procedural or treatment instructions or clinical calculations are not created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |