| 1 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N01 · Evidence conditionHow does the selected 120-minute response differ from the parent verdict?Required |
The selection is response at 120 minutes in acute tension-type headache, with original subclaim D. The explanation that the larger registered trial's first primary endpoint missed its prespecified threshold is retained, with parent D28 kept as separate context. |
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 the selected question, grade, original explanation and parent context |
Material needed: Individual score, status and axes are absent from the selection. Original selected and parent records must be linked without automatically assigning parent values to the subclaim. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 2 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N02 · Evidence conditionWhich population with acute tension-type headache was studied?Required |
The S02 bibliography records a placebo-controlled phase 4 trial in episodic tension-type headache. Migraine is excluded from the parent account's research scope and is not treated as the same population. |
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, eligibility, age and attack selection in the follow-up trial |
Material needed: Original diagnostic, inclusion and exclusion, age, baseline pain, comorbidity and attack-selection rules are needed. Detailed eligibility absent from the stored summary is not filled in. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 3 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N03 · Evidence conditionWhich 10% topical peppermint-oil formulation was studied?Required |
The parent account concerns repeated application of a 10% peppermint-oil ethanol solution to the forehead and temples. Inhaled aroma and oral enteric capsules are different interventions. |
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. |
Topical formulation, concentration, vehicle, quality and application sites |
Material needed: S02 product, manufacturing, quality, vehicle, ethanol concentration and application specifications are needed. The early formulation is not automatically treated as identical to the follow-up formulation. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 4 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N04 · Evidence conditionWhich trial used 90% ethanol and the 0/15/30-minute schedule?Required |
S01's 10% oil, 90% ethanol and application at 0, 15 and 30 minutes are early-trial conditions in the preserved account. They are not transferred as S02's exact formulation or schedule. |
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 concentrations, application amounts and repeat schedules in the early and follow-up trials |
Material needed: Follow-up application amount, volume, frequency, timing, vehicle and adherence records are needed. No new undiluted preparation or personal-use instructions are created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 5 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N05 · Evidence conditionAre the placebo vehicle and blinding procedures verified?Required |
S02 is described as placebo-controlled and S01 as a double-blind crossover trial. Design labels alone do not verify odor, cooling, irritation matching or successful blinding in the follow-up trial. |
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. |
Sensory matching and participant and assessor blinding in the follow-up trial |
Material needed: S02 control formulation, vehicle, sensory differences, blinding procedures and assessment records are needed. Unread external material is not converted into procedure verification or blinding failure. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 6 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N06 · Evidence conditionHow are 209 starters and 189 in FAS distinguished?Required |
S02 preserves 209 starters, 189 in FAS and 94 versus 95. Starting size and analysis population are not treated as identical, and their difference is not calculated into a new dropout count. |
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. |
Participant flow across starting, allocation, analysis populations and individual outcomes |
Material needed: Original flow diagrams, arm-specific allocation, FAS definitions, exclusion reasons and other analysis populations are needed. Preserved counts are not arbitrarily relabeled as recruitment, allocation or completion counts. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 7 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N07 · Evidence conditionHow are 120-minute responders and denominators linked?Required |
The preserved S02 comparison is 37/94 versus 28/95. These counts are retained without inventing original arm labels or handling of missing assessments that are not linked in the 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. |
Correspondence between original arm labels, responders, denominators and analysis populations |
Material needed: Original arm-specific VPRS tables, denominator definitions, arm labels and missing-data handling are needed. New response rates, effects or CIs are not calculated. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 8 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N08 · Evidence conditionHow were FAS exclusions and missing outcomes handled?Required |
The account gives 189 in FAS and 120-minute response counts. This is not converted into complete outcome data for every participant or verification of all analysis rules. |
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. |
Analysis populations, missing assessments, rescue medication and sensitivity analyses |
Material needed: FAS, ITT and PP definitions, handling of exclusions, missingness, rescue medication and protocol deviations, and sensitivity analyses are needed. Unverified missing-data policies are not invented. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 9 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N09 · Evidence conditionWhat is the exact definition of a VPRS response?Required |
S02's first primary endpoint is VPRS response at 120 minutes. Its name alone does not establish the scale range, response threshold, baseline conditions or exact assessment window. |
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. |
Scale, response threshold, baseline conditions, assessors and measurement window |
Material needed: Original VPRS items, response criteria, baseline pain, assessment manuals and timing are needed. Definitions absent from the stored summary are not added. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 10 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N10 · Evidence conditionIs the 120-minute response the same as early pain findings from 15 minutes?Required |
S01 concerns pain intensity from 15 minutes, while S02 concerns VPRS response at 120 minutes. Different time points and measures are not combined as one result, and the early signal is not converted into confirmation of the later response. |
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 trial-specific time points, scales and assessment units |
Material needed: Time-specific results, scales, prespecified outcomes and analysis units from both reports are needed. Persistence or the same target effect is not inferred without direct linking information. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 11 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N11 · Evidence conditionWhat was the prespecified order of the first primary endpoint and VAS-SPID?Required |
The account distinguishes 120-minute VPRS as the first primary endpoint and VAS-SPID as hierarchically second. The original interpretation of the latter as exploratory after the first threshold was missed 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. |
Hierarchy and testing rules for VPRS and VAS-SPID |
Material needed: Complete initial registration, protocols, analysis plans, amendment history and hierarchy rules are needed. Preserved statements about prespecification are not converted into current reading of original plans. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 12 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N12 · Evidence conditionWhat is the prespecified one-sided Fisher .025 threshold?Required |
S02 is preserved as having missed its prespecified one-sided Fisher .025 threshold. The original trial's exact one-sided P value and analysis output are not linked in the 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. |
Prespecified test direction, significance level, exact P value and decision rule |
Material needed: Original prespecified testing plans, direction, significance level, exact P value and analysis output are needed. A two-sided calculation is not substituted for the prespecified one-sided result. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 13 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N13 · Evidence conditionWhose calculation is the two-sided Fisher P≈.101?Required |
The preserved evidence explicitly attributes the count-based two-sided Fisher P≈.101 to a historical Codex recalculation. Its value and attribution are retained without a new calculation or reproduction 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. |
Distinction between the original prespecified analysis and the historical Codex calculation |
Material needed: Original prespecified analysis output and historical calculation records are separately needed. The historical value is not relabeled as a one-sided P value prespecified and reported by the trial. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 14 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N14 · Evidence conditionAre precision and importance of the 120-minute effect established?Required |
Response counts, failure to meet the prespecified threshold and the parent explanation of a direction favoring benefit are preserved together. These alone do not establish an exact effect range or absence of clinically important benefit. |
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 between-arm effect measure, CI, clinical importance threshold and sample-size plan |
Material needed: Original between-arm estimates, CIs, effect measures, clinical importance thresholds and sample-size plans are needed. New RDs, RRs, CIs or importance thresholds are not calculated. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 15 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N15 · Evidence conditionDoes missing the prespecified threshold establish an exact zero effect?Required |
The parent account explains that 37/94 versus 28/95 favors benefit in direction but does not prove an exact zero effect and missed the prespecified threshold. This distinction 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. |
Separate preservation of the failed threshold, effect direction and uncertainty |
Material needed: Original estimates, CIs and testing plans are needed. This is not converted into exact zero effects, equivalence, established efficacy or a new grade. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 16 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N16 · Evidence conditionHow far can the second VAS-SPID endpoint be interpreted?Required |
The account treats the second VAS-SPID endpoint as exploratory after the first primary endpoint failed. It is not substituted as success for the selected 120-minute VPRS response. |
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. |
VAS-SPID definition, time window, estimation and interpretation after hierarchical testing |
Material needed: Original VAS-SPID definitions, result tables, estimates, CIs, P values and prespecified hierarchy are needed. Exact findings absent from the summary are not invented. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 17 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N17 · Evidence conditionDo the early 41 participants and 164 attacks represent the same denominator?Required |
S01 is a repeated-attack crossover trial with 41 participants and 164 headache attacks. The 164 attacks are not relabeled as participants or used as the follow-up trial's analysis denominator. |
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 patients, repeated attacks, treatment order and analysis units |
Material needed: Attacks per patient, patient and attack flow, correlation structure, completion denominators and analysis models are needed. New participant or event totals are not created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 18 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N18 · Evidence conditionAre sequence, period and carryover effects in the crossover trial verified?Required |
S01's randomized, double-blind, repeated-attack crossover design labels are retained. They are not converted into verification of all sequence allocation, washout, carryover and analysis procedures. |
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. |
Treatment sequence, washout, carryover, period effects and repeated-data handling |
Material needed: Original crossover protocols, analysis plans, period-specific results and handling of repeated observations are needed. Unread originals are not labeled as verified procedures. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 19 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N19 · Evidence conditionAre the small early positive finding and larger follow-up failure both preserved?Required |
S01's lower pain versus placebo at P<.01 and S02's failed first 120-minute primary endpoint are retained together. The early signal is not erased or the follow-up relabeled as successful. |
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. |
Findings and directness across different trials, outcomes and designs |
Material needed: Populations, formulations, outcomes, timing, protocols and analyses from both reports are needed. New confirmation of matched independent replication for the same target effect is not created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 20 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N20 · Evidence conditionIs equivalence to acetaminophen the same question?Required |
The original explanation that no difference from acetaminophen in S01 does not establish equivalence is retained. This separate subclaim is not combined with the current 120-minute VPRS finding. |
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 placebo comparisons and separate equivalence or noninferiority designs |
Material needed: Original comparison designs, results, equivalence margins, tests and CIs are needed. No new judgment establishing equivalence or noninferiority is made. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 21 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N21 · Evidence conditionDo EudraCT and NCT identifiers count as separate trials?Required |
The S02 bibliography records EudraCT 2011-004777-89 and NCT01770080 together. Their preserved connection to the same follow-up trial is not added as independent trials. |
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. |
Links between registration identifiers, result reports and the same trial family |
Material needed: Original registration versions, cross-references, result documents and cohort links are needed. Current external identity verification or unique participant and replication totals are not established. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 22 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N22 · Evidence conditionHow do the registered-results version, posting date and original evidence date differ?Required |
The bibliography records results version 1 posted on 2025-05-22, while the original evidence date is 2026-09-07. Registered-trial results are not relabeled as an external paper or completed current reading. |
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 result posting, version, preserved evidence and production dates |
Material needed: Original results versions, subsequent amendments and registration history are needed. Current public availability and the latest linked version are unverified; condition and view production dates are distinct from completed content review. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 23 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N23 · Evidence conditionWere original registration, protocols and analysis plans actually read?Required |
Original statements about registration and hierarchy are used as information from the stored summary. Presence of a results URL is not converted into acquisition or reading of original registration, protocols or analysis plans. |
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. |
Links between prespecified plans, outcome changes and actual results |
Material needed: Original initial registration, amendment history, protocols, analysis plans and correspondence to results are needed. External materials remain unread with access unattempted. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 24 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N24 · Evidence conditionAre rescue medication, concurrent care and actual application distinguished?Supplementary |
The account describes repeated topical application and comparison with placebo. This is not converted into verification of S02 rescue medication, concurrent care, adherence or handling of outcomes after rescue medication. |
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. |
Analgesic rescue medication, other care, application adherence and assessment timing |
Material needed: Original concurrent-medication and rescue rules, application performance, adherence, assessment records and analysis policies are needed. Effects of concurrent care are not attributed solely to peppermint oil. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 25 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N25 · Evidence conditionAre funding and manufacturer involvement in the early trial verified?Required |
The original S01 record of unverified specific funding and manufacturer involvement is retained. Missing information is not converted into absence of support or interests, or independence. |
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. |
Separate verification of funding, supplied products, employee authors and interests |
Material needed: Original funding, supplied-product, author-affiliation, employee-role and COI documents are needed. Unverified entries are not filled in as independent. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 26 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N26 · Evidence conditionWhich roles are known from Cassella-med sponsorship?Required |
S02's sponsorship by Cassella-med GmbH is preserved without relabeling it as independent funding. Details of product support, employee authorship, design, analysis and publication roles remain separately unverified. |
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. |
Sponsorship, product support, authorship, interests and analysis or publication control |
Material needed: Original sponsorship, support, author affiliations, COI and analysis or publication-role documents are needed. Sponsorship alone does not establish other roles or a new independence grade. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 27 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N27 · Evidence conditionAre direct data on skin and eye harms available?Supplementary |
Parent cautions about stinging, redness and eye injury with concentrated oil and ethanol are retained as historical information. These cautions are not converted into trial-specific event rates or established causality. |
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. |
Adverse-event definitions, collection, severity, arm-specific events and denominators |
Material needed: S02 original adverse-event tables, arm-specific events and denominators, collection, discontinuation, exposure and timing are needed. Evidence gaps are not labeled as safety or absence of harm. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 28 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N28 · Evidence conditionAre harms comparisons and missingness for oil, ethanol and vehicle verified?Supplementary |
The preserved account concerns a specific topical formulation and caution scope. This is not converted into verification of active-versus-vehicle harm differences, exposure causes, concurrent exposures or missing safety data. |
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. |
Exposure-specific harms, active-versus-vehicle comparisons and concurrent exposures |
Material needed: Original arm-specific harms, exposure, concurrent exposures, observation and missingness records are needed. Vehicle effects are not converted into causality attributed to oil itself or new risk numbers. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 29 |
Unverified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N29 · Evidence conditionIs safety established for repeated or long-term use and vulnerable groups?Supplementary |
Parent cautions concerning eyes, mucosa, broken skin and children's faces are retained as historical wording. Acute response findings or these cautions are not extended into safety certification for long-term use or vulnerable groups. |
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 trials and repeated-use, long-term and age-specific harms |
Material needed: Direct safety information for repeated or long-term use, ages and vulnerable groups is needed. Unlinked materials are not used to create new application, discontinuation or treatment instructions. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 30 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N30 · Evidence conditionCan findings be extended to other formulations, headache types or long-term outcomes?Required |
The original research scope excludes inhaled aroma, oral enteric capsules and migraine. The selected 120-minute response is not automatically generalized to other conditions, formulations, routes or long-term 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 topical formulation, tension-type headache and acute response |
Material needed: Separate information on the relevant formulation, condition, period and direct comparisons is needed. Effects of different exposures are not transferred merely because names are shared. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 31 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N31 · Evidence conditionAre the parent's representative details and assessment axes the same as the follow-up outcome?Required |
The parent's representative details include 41 participants, 164 attacks, pain from 15 minutes and vehicle comparison. These are not transferred as denominators or outcomes for the selected 120-minute follow-up result, and parent assessment axes are not newly assigned to the subclaim. |
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 parent early-trial details and the selected follow-up trial |
Material needed: Original formulation, population, timing and outcome records must be linked to the applicable scope of parent flags. Preserved assessment flags do not establish new content review or subclaim assessment. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 32 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N32 · Evidence conditionAre original Korean and English wording, grades and correction history retained?Required |
Parent Korean and English wording and D28, together with the explanation for selected D, are preserved. Original corrections and deliberation are empty, and historical cross-checking language is not inherited as completed current content review or a new clinical 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. |
Preservation of bilingual wording, grades, explanations and empty fields in parent and selected records |
Material needed: Complete original materials, the selected explanation, authorized corrections and prior-version records are needed. Scores, status or axes absent from the selection, or new deliberation findings, are not created. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |
| 33 |
Partly verified |
Full text not readStored summary read |
N33 · Evidence conditionAre reading of stored summaries and external originals distinguished?Required |
This production transfers information read from the complete stored parent summary and bibliography. S01 paper and S02 registered-results bibliographies are distinguished, while external materials remain unread with access unattempted. |
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. |
Actual reading, material type, links and access scope for each report |
Material needed: Authorized external originals, registered results, original registration, protocols, analysis plans and support documents are needed. Links or needed-material entries are not converted into acquisition, full-text reading or completed clinical review. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. |