# Zintoma Ginger 750 mg/day × Rhodes Nausea Subscore Over 4 Days in Early Pregnancy Verdict 3047 · Evidence Check Stored-material review date: Not recorded Original evidence cut-off: 2026-09-08 Review-criteria version: 1.0 Public page/material preparation date: 2026-10-25 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: Women with singleton pregnancies before 16 weeks and mild or moderate nausea/vomiting - Ingredient, formulation and route: Oral Zintoma capsules derived from the rhizome of Zingiber officinale Roscoe. Gingerol/shogaol assays, extraction methods, batches and standardization remain unverified. - Dose: A 250 mg capsule 3 times daily, with a retained daily total of 750 mg/day. This is not changed into another formulation or a converted active-ingredient amount. - Comparator: The same dietary advice and lactose placebo capsules. Adherence to dietary advice and details of concurrent and rescue treatment remain unverified. - Measured outcome: Change in the Rhodes nausea subscore. The prespecified hierarchy for nausea alone and details of scale, score direction, assessor, baseline and daily measurements remain unverified. - Duration: Treatment over 4 days. Persistence afterward and long-term maternal/fetal follow-up remain unverified. - Questions outside this scope: Transfer of the same effect to foods, powders, other extracts, oils, topical products or combinations; Extension of nausea-score improvement to vomiting frequency, admission or pregnancy outcomes; Interpretation of placebo comparisons as equivalence or noninferiority against an active comparator; Replacement of hyperemesis treatment or establishment of long-term maternal/fetal safety ## Checklist items ### N01 · Which early-pregnancy nausea question does the table cover? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original claim is reduced nausea severity in early pregnancy. Vomiting frequency, admission and pregnancy outcomes remain separate. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Detailed eligibility and the clinical endpoint hierarchy in the external original trial remain unread. - Required materials and conditions: The comparison boundary for nausea severity between oral Zintoma capsules and placebo - Materials to obtain first: Original-trial eligibility/endpoint tables and prespecified plans - Further research: Material needed: Original-trial eligibility/endpoint tables and prespecified plans. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on The comparison boundary for nausea severity between oral Zintoma capsules and placebo must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on The comparison boundary for nausea severity between oral Zintoma capsules and placebo is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N02 · Which pregnant population is represented? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained population is women with singleton pregnancies before 16 weeks and mild or moderate nausea/vomiting. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Recruitment route, age, excluded conditions, baseline risk and detailed eligibility remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Eligibility for singleton pregnancy before 16 weeks with mild or moderate nausea/vomiting - Materials to obtain first: Recruitment/eligibility tables and baseline characteristics - Further research: Material needed: Recruitment/eligibility tables and baseline characteristics. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Eligibility for singleton pregnancy before 16 weeks with mild or moderate nausea/vomiting must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Eligibility for singleton pregnancy before 16 weeks with mild or moderate nausea/vomiting is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N03 · Is this the same treatment question as hyperemesis gravidarum? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record states that findings cannot be extended to replacement of hyperemesis treatment. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Direct comparisons for dehydration, admission or severe hyperemesis are not established in the retained summary. - Required materials and conditions: Distinction between mild/moderate nausea and severe hyperemesis gravidarum - Materials to obtain first: Severity definitions and hyperemesis-comparison results - Further research: Material needed: Severity definitions and hyperemesis-comparison results. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Distinction between mild/moderate nausea and severe hyperemesis gravidarum must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Distinction between mild/moderate nausea and severe hyperemesis gravidarum is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N04 · Is the ginger formulation and product the same? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained product is Zintoma 250 mg capsules; gingerol/shogaol assays and extraction methods remain unverified. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Batch, standardization, assay and extraction material are absent. - Required materials and conditions: Manufacturing, extraction and ingredient assays for Zintoma 250 mg capsules - Materials to obtain first: Product/batch and ingredient-analysis material - Further research: Material needed: Product/batch and ingredient-analysis material. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Manufacturing, extraction and ingredient assays for Zintoma 250 mg capsules must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Manufacturing, extraction and ingredient assays for Zintoma 250 mg capsules is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N05 · What is the intervention route? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The selected route is oral. The original record limits interchangeability among foods, powders, standardized extracts, oils, topical products and combinations. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Effects of other routes/formulations are not established by this material. - Required materials and conditions: Distinction between oral capsules and foods, oils, topical products and combinations - Materials to obtain first: Intervention-administration records - Further research: Material needed: Intervention-administration records. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Distinction between oral capsules and foods, oils, topical products and combinations must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Distinction between oral capsules and foods, oils, topical products and combinations is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N06 · What were the dose and intake frequency? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained dose is 250 mg, 3 times daily, totaling 750 mg/day. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Actual intake, adherence and dose-change records remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Actual administration/adherence for 250 mg, 3 times daily, with a total of 750 mg/day - Materials to obtain first: Administration and medication-adherence records - Further research: Material needed: Administration and medication-adherence records. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Actual administration/adherence for 250 mg, 3 times daily, with a total of 750 mg/day must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Actual administration/adherence for 250 mg, 3 times daily, with a total of 750 mg/day is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N07 · Are duration and measurement times distinguished? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained intervention description records treatment over 4 days. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Daily measurement schedules, persistence after treatment and longer follow-up remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Treatment over 4 days and the nausea-measurement schedule - Materials to obtain first: Visit schedules and endpoint-measurement tables - Further research: Material needed: Visit schedules and endpoint-measurement tables. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Treatment over 4 days and the nausea-measurement schedule must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Treatment over 4 days and the nausea-measurement schedule is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N08 · What was the common dietary advice in the placebo comparison? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The comparator is recorded as the same dietary advice and lactose placebo capsules. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Adherence to dietary advice and group-specific use of other or rescue treatment remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: A comparison retaining the same dietary advice and lactose placebo - Materials to obtain first: Dietary-advice, concurrent-treatment and rescue-treatment records - Further research: Material needed: Dietary-advice, concurrent-treatment and rescue-treatment records. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on A comparison retaining the same dietary advice and lactose placebo must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on A comparison retaining the same dietary advice and lactose placebo is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N09 · How is the direct report identified? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained bibliography records Saberi 2014, PMID 25414888, PMCID PMC4228518 and DOI 10.17795/nmsjournal11841. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Current external bibliography, identity of the original file and full text remain unread. - Required materials and conditions: Retained links among the Saberi report title, PMID, PMCID and DOI - Materials to obtain first: Original paper and bibliographic record - Further research: Material needed: Original paper and bibliographic record. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Retained links among the Saberi report title, PMID, PMCID and DOI must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Retained links among the Saberi report title, PMID, PMCID and DOI is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N10 · Do a registration number and registration content have the same verification level? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The bibliography contains IRCT201103192699N4, while registration status in the original record remains unverified. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: The registration document, timing, change history and correspondence with the original trial remain unread. - Required materials and conditions: Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 wording and the actual registration document - Materials to obtain first: Original registration and its history - Further research: Material needed: Original registration and its history. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 wording and the actual registration document must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 wording and the actual registration document is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N11 · Was the nausea-only endpoint prespecified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record states that the prespecified hierarchy for the selected nausea-only endpoint was insufficient. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Whether it was a single primary endpoint (1st in the hierarchy), subscore selection and the multiple-endpoint plan remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Prespecified hierarchy, analysis and timing of the Rhodes nausea subscore - Materials to obtain first: Protocol, statistical analysis plan and registered endpoints - Further research: Material needed: Protocol, statistical analysis plan and registered endpoints. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Prespecified hierarchy, analysis and timing of the Rhodes nausea subscore must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Prespecified hierarchy, analysis and timing of the Rhodes nausea subscore is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N12 · How was 3-arm randomization performed? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The direct report is retained as a 3-arm randomized placebo-controlled trial. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Sequence generation, allocation concealment and detailed allocation across all 3 arms remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Allocation sequence, concealment, arm definitions and recruitment flow - Materials to obtain first: Allocation methods and arm-specific participant flow - Further research: Material needed: Allocation methods and arm-specific participant flow. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Allocation sequence, concealment, arm definitions and recruitment flow must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Allocation sequence, concealment, arm definitions and recruitment flow is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N13 · Were blinding and a similar placebo maintained? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The summary includes placebo capsules and the same dietary advice. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Ginger taste/smell, placebo matching, assessor blinding and unblinding remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Participant/assessor blinding and sensory placebo matching - Materials to obtain first: Placebo composition, blinding methods and unblinding records - Further research: Material needed: Placebo composition, blinding methods and unblinding records. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Participant/assessor blinding and sensory placebo matching must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Participant/assessor blinding and sensory placebo matching is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N14 · What were the overall 3-arm and main-analysis denominators? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained denominators are 120 allocated and 106 in the main analysis. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Arm-specific allocation/analysis denominators and analysis-population definitions remain unverified in detail. - Required materials and conditions: Distinction between 120 allocated and 106 in the main analysis overall - Materials to obtain first: Arm-specific flow diagrams and analysis-population definitions - Further research: Material needed: Arm-specific flow diagrams and analysis-population definitions. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Distinction between 120 allocated and 106 in the main analysis overall must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Distinction between 120 allocated and 106 in the main analysis overall is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N15 · What were the denominators of the selected direct comparison? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained direct comparison has 80 allocated and 73 analyzed. These are not added to the overall 120 and 106. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Individual denominators of the two comparison arms and correspondence with analysis counts absent from the original record remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Distinction between 80 allocated/73 analyzed in the direct comparison and all 3 arms - Materials to obtain first: Arm-specific allocated/analyzed counts for the selected comparison - Further research: Material needed: Arm-specific allocated/analyzed counts for the selected comparison. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Distinction between 80 allocated/73 analyzed in the direct comparison and all 3 arms must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Distinction between 80 allocated/73 analyzed in the direct comparison and all 3 arms is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N16 · What were the losses to observation and analysis assumptions? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current summary distinguishes allocated participants from those in the main analysis. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Withdrawal reasons, arm-specific losses, missing-data handling and ITT status remain unverified. Differences in counts are not newly calculated. - Required materials and conditions: Withdrawal reasons, missing-data handling, ITT and adherence analyses - Materials to obtain first: Withdrawal, missing-data handling and analysis plans - Further research: Material needed: Withdrawal, missing-data handling and analysis plans. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Withdrawal reasons, missing-data handling, ITT and adherence analyses must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Withdrawal reasons, missing-data handling, ITT and adherence analyses is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N17 · How was the Rhodes subscore measured? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The selected endpoint is change in the Rhodes nausea subscore. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Scale range, original definition of score direction, assessor, baseline and daily times remain unverified in detail. - Required materials and conditions: Nausea-subscore scale, direction, baseline and measurement times - Materials to obtain first: Scale/questionnaire, baseline and measurement tables - Further research: Material needed: Scale/questionnaire, baseline and measurement tables. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Nausea-subscore scale, direction, baseline and measurement times must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Nausea-subscore scale, direction, baseline and measurement times is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N18 · What do reductions of 3.86 and 1.26 mean? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained result is a reduction of 3.86±2.35 versus 1.26±1.57. These values are recorded unchanged without creating a new difference. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: The statistical definition of ±, arm mapping in the original table and the exact between-group change estimate remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Arm-specific reductions, spread values and arm mapping - Materials to obtain first: Original result tables and analysis output - Further research: Material needed: Original result tables and analysis output. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Arm-specific reductions, spread values and arm mapping must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Arm-specific reductions, spread values and arm mapping is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N19 · Is P=.001 the test of the selected two arms? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original P=.001 is retained as coming from the 3-arm ANOVA. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: The exact pairwise P value for the selected two arms and multiple-comparison adjustment remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Distinction between the 3-arm ANOVA and pairwise-comparison P values - Materials to obtain first: 3-arm/pairwise analysis tables and analysis plans - Further research: Material needed: 3-arm/pairwise analysis tables and analysis plans. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Distinction between the 3-arm ANOVA and pairwise-comparison P values must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Distinction between the 3-arm ANOVA and pairwise-comparison P values is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N20 · Is an exact interval available for the pairwise effect? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current summary leaves the exact pairwise CI unverified. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: The between-group estimate and 95% CI are absent. No new CI is calculated from retained means, spread values or denominators. - Required materials and conditions: Effect estimate and confidence interval for the selected direct comparison - Materials to obtain first: Original tables of between-group estimates and 95% CIs - Further research: Material needed: Original tables of between-group estimates and 95% CIs. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Effect estimate and confidence interval for the selected direct comparison must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Effect estimate and confidence interval for the selected direct comparison is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N21 · Is the score difference clinically important? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained material describes a signal of improved nausea scores. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Important-difference/responder criteria and perceived change for the Rhodes nausea subscore remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Minimum important difference, responder criteria and patient-important outcomes - Materials to obtain first: Important-difference evidence and responder results - Further research: Material needed: Important-difference evidence and responder results. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Minimum important difference, responder criteria and patient-important outcomes must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Minimum important difference, responder criteria and patient-important outcomes is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N22 · Which comparison does the pooled meta-analysis result represent? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained meta-analysis records 13 studies with 1,174 people and nausea versus placebo with SMD 0.821, 95% CI 0.585~1.056 and I²=38.9%. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Exact sign conventions for effect direction, inclusion tables, models, subgroup analyses and product-specific values remain unread in the original paper. - Required materials and conditions: The 13 studies with 1,174 people and SMD for nausea severity versus placebo - Materials to obtain first: Original meta-analysis, inclusion tables and pooled models - Further research: Material needed: Original meta-analysis, inclusion tables and pooled models. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on The 13 studies with 1,174 people and SMD for nausea severity versus placebo must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on The 13 studies with 1,174 people and SMD for nausea severity versus placebo is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S02 ### N23 · Is the vitamin B6 comparison the same as placebo? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record and meta-analysis summary record a null result against B6, distinguished from improvement versus placebo. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: B6 doses, comparison-specific estimates/CIs and equivalence/noninferiority designs remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Separation of active-comparator B6 and placebo comparisons - Materials to obtain first: Comparator-specific results and B6 administration conditions - Further research: Material needed: Comparator-specific results and B6 administration conditions. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Separation of active-comparator B6 and placebo comparisons must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Separation of active-comparator B6 and placebo comparisons is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S02 ### N24 · How varied were formulations, doses and scales across pooled trials? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record describes varied formulations, doses, scales and quality across included trials and retains I²=38.9%. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Product-specific heterogeneity and a separate pooled estimate for the selected Zintoma conditions remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: I² and variation in formulations, doses, scales and methodology - Materials to obtain first: Trial-specific formulation, dose, scale and methods tables - Further research: Material needed: Trial-specific formulation, dose, scale and methods tables. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on I² and variation in formulations, doses, scales and methodology must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on I² and variation in formulations, doses, scales and methodology is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S02 ### N25 · Are the same original trials counted repeatedly? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record states that meta-analyses share many original trials. Direct-trial and pooled denominators are not added. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Exact inclusion relationships between these reports, shared-trial lists with other reviews and unique trial/participant counts remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Relationships among reports, trials and meta-analysis inclusion - Materials to obtain first: Report-trial mapping and included-trial lists - Further research: Material needed: Report-trial mapping and included-trial lists. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Relationships among reports, trials and meta-analysis inclusion must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Relationships among reports, trials and meta-analysis inclusion is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N26 · What scope of information does university funding provide? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained direct-trial funding is Kashan University grant 8614. The meta-analysis is recorded as having university affiliations and mixed original-trial funding. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Details of funding contracts and roles in design, analysis and publication remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Kashan University grant 8614 and research-funding relationships - Materials to obtain first: Funding statements, contracts and research-role disclosures - Further research: Material needed: Funding statements, contracts and research-role disclosures. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Kashan University grant 8614 and research-funding relationships must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Kashan University grant 8614 and research-funding relationships is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N27 · Are product supply, employee authors and COI separately verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: University grant wording and generic English funding wording are retained. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Specific material on product supply, manufacturer involvement, employee authorship and declared COI remains separately unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Free product support, company roles, employee authorship and conflicts beyond funding - Materials to obtain first: Original product-support, affiliation and COI statements - Further research: Material needed: Original product-support, affiliation and COI statements. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Free product support, company roles, employee authorship and conflicts beyond funding must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Free product support, company roles, employee authorship and conflicts beyond funding is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N28 · How were short-term discomfort and drug interactions recorded? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained safety description notes caution about acid reflux, abdominal discomfort, diarrhea and possible drug interactions. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Arm-specific adverse-event counts, event definitions, collection methods and concurrent-drug records in the direct trial remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Reflux, abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, concurrent drugs and collection methods - Materials to obtain first: Adverse-event tables, collection methods and concurrent-drug records - Further research: Material needed: Adverse-event tables, collection methods and concurrent-drug records. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Reflux, abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, concurrent drugs and collection methods must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Reflux, abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, concurrent drugs and collection methods is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01 ### N29 · Are pregnancy outcomes and long-term maternal/fetal safety answered? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record limits interpretation: nausea-score benefit does not answer long-term maternal/fetal safety. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: A summary of 4-day treatment does not provide material establishing pregnancy outcomes, rare harms or long-term risk. - Required materials and conditions: Pregnancy outcomes, miscarriage, long-term maternal/fetal follow-up and denominators - Materials to obtain first: Pregnancy-outcome and exposure/follow-up denominator material - Further research: Material needed: Pregnancy-outcome and exposure/follow-up denominator material. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Pregnancy outcomes, miscarriage, long-term maternal/fetal follow-up and denominators must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Pregnancy outcomes, miscarriage, long-term maternal/fetal follow-up and denominators is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N30 · What level of information do references to ACOG, NCCIH and EMA provide? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record states that ACOG, NCCIH and EMA material was compared and summarizes NCCIH consultation advice and EMA precautionary caution. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Current agency-document versions, exact locations, products, doses and recommendation scopes remain unread in this work. - Required materials and conditions: Actual agency-specific wording, products and dose material - Materials to obtain first: Agency-document versions and original text locations - Further research: Material needed: Agency-document versions and original text locations. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Actual agency-specific wording, products and dose material must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Actual agency-specific wording, products and dose material is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N31 · Can findings extend to vomiting frequency, admission or hyperemesis treatment? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original record records a null pooled result for vomiting frequency and makes no claim of admission prevention or replacement of hyperemesis treatment. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: The exact pooled vomiting estimate/CI and admission/severe-treatment outcomes remain unverified from the current summary alone. - Required materials and conditions: Direct comparisons and null findings for other endpoints - Materials to obtain first: Original endpoint-specific vomiting and admission result tables - Further research: Material needed: Original endpoint-specific vomiting and admission result tables. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Direct comparisons and null findings for other endpoints must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Direct comparisons and null findings for other endpoints is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N32 · How are English wording and historical corrections retained? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: Current English wording and the correction event for 2 fields are preserved unchanged. Some generic English wording in the original evidence summaries does not replace verification of specific values. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: The complete earlier English wording, individual fields before/after correction and correspondence with external full text are not established from this input alone. - Required materials and conditions: Current Korean/English wording and the English placeholder correction of 2026-09-14 - Materials to obtain first: Original wording before/after correction and translation mapping - Further research: Material needed: Original wording before/after correction and translation mapping. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Current Korean/English wording and the English placeholder correction of 2026-09-14 must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Current Korean/English wording and the English placeholder correction of 2026-09-14 is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N33 · How are the C score of 50, axes and historical independent cross-check retained? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current C score of 50, original axes and previous independent cross-check wording are original values. They are not inherited as fulfilled conditions or completed new review in this preparation. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: Review of existing content remains incomplete. - Required materials and conditions: Historical preservation of the original grade, score, axes, verdict date and previous verification wording - Materials to obtain first: Additional review comments and future correction material - Further research: Material needed: Additional review comments and future correction material. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Historical preservation of the original grade, score, axes, verdict date and previous verification wording must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Historical preservation of the original grade, score, axes, verdict date and previous verification wording is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ### N34 · What was actually read, and what do the dates mean? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean and English summaries and bibliography were read. External papers, abstracts/full texts, registration, protocols, analysis plans, result tables and support disclosures remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: Preparation read the complete stored summary. The original verdict date is 2026-09-08 and the correction date is 2026-09-14. External originals, registration and plans remain unread. - Why unverified: Information in stored summaries is linked to gaps in detailed material. External original-source comparison and content review remain incomplete; effects, safety, prespecification, independence or fulfilled conditions are not certified. - Reason for missing information: No external access was attempted, so material is not labeled inaccessible or original-source verified. - Required materials and conditions: Distinction between the stored record and external-paper, registration and planning material read - Materials to obtain first: Required originals, registration, protocol and SAP material when provided - Further research: Material needed: Required originals, registration, protocol and SAP material when provided. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Original material and analysis scope on Distinction between the stored record and external-paper, registration and planning material read must link to product, dose, duration, population, placebo comparison and the nausea endpoint, distinguishing stored information from what remains unverified. - Why this condition is needed: Material on Distinction between the stored record and external-paper, registration and planning material read is needed to connect the selected product, population, common dietary advice, nausea endpoint, denominators, comparison scope or harm gaps. - Application exceptions: All-arm analysis is distinguished from the selected direct comparison, and allocation, main-analysis and direct-comparison denominators are not interchanged or added. New effects, confidence intervals or withdrawal counts are not calculated. Nausea results are not extended to vomiting, admission, replacement of hyperemesis treatment, pregnancy outcomes or long-term safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Gaps remain in product-specific directness, prespecified endpoint hierarchy, exact pairwise effects, denominators, allocation, blinding, missingness, measurement, multiplicity, independent replication, support and harms. Existing grade, cross-check and correction wording are historical records, not current external reading or new clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing principles distinguish population, product, oral dose, duration, dietary advice, nausea endpoint, prespecified hierarchy, all-arm/selected comparisons, denominators, overlapping reports, support and harms in the retained ginger reports. - Related sources: S01, S02 ## Evidence and sources ### S01 Saberi et al. (2014): Effect of Ginger on Relieving Nausea and Vomiting in Pregnancy: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25414888/) Materials actually read: Stored summary and bibliography read; external paper, registration and planning material unread Findings recorded in the summary: Overall 120 allocated and 106 in the main analysis; direct comparison of 80 allocated and 73 analyzed. Reductions of 3.86±2.35 versus 1.26±1.57 are retained. The definition of ± and arm mapping remain unverified. P=.001 is from the 3-arm ANOVA; exact pairwise P and 95% CI remain unverified. Record level: Reductions and all-arm test in a stored summary; exact pairwise effect unverified Independent replication: The inclusion relationship and overlap between the direct trial and meta-analysis remain unverified. The overall 120 allocated and 106 in the main analysis, selected direct comparison of 80 allocated and 73 analyzed, and pooled 13 studies with 1,174 people are not added together. Unique trials, participant totals and independent replications matching the product conditions remain unverified. | Material | Public availability | Access status | Actually read | Notes | |---|---|---|---|---| | Stored existing review summary | Existing stored summary acquired | Stored summary | Stored summary read | The stored existing evidence and bibliography summary was read. Saberi F et al. Nurs Midwifery Stud. 2014. PMID: 25414888. PMCID: PMC4228518. DOI: 10.17795/nmsjournal11841. IRCT201103192699N4. Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 and PMC4228518 are distinguished from unverified registration status in the original record. Identifiers do not establish current reading of registration content, prospective timing, endpoints, changes or full text. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | External article, abstract and full text | Original bibliography link only; external content unread | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | Only the bibliographic article/abstract/full-text link is retained. External content is unread, with no access attempt. Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 and PMC4228518 are distinguished from unverified registration status in the original record. Identifiers do not establish current reading of registration content, prospective timing, endpoints, changes or full text. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Registration material | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | Original registration/changes and prespecified endpoints remain unread. Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 and PMC4228518 are distinguished from unverified registration status in the original record. Identifiers do not establish current reading of registration content, prospective timing, endpoints, changes or full text. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Protocol | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | The original protocol and its changes remain unread. Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 and PMC4228518 are distinguished from unverified registration status in the original record. Identifiers do not establish current reading of registration content, prospective timing, endpoints, changes or full text. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Statistical analysis plan (SAP) | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | The original prespecified statistical analysis plan and multiplicity plan remain unread. Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 and PMC4228518 are distinguished from unverified registration status in the original record. Identifiers do not establish current reading of registration content, prospective timing, endpoints, changes or full text. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Funding, product-support and conflict material | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | Original funding, product-support, employee-authorship and conflict disclosures remain unread. Bibliographic IRCT201103192699N4 and PMC4228518 are distinguished from unverified registration status in the original record. Identifiers do not establish current reading of registration content, prospective timing, endpoints, changes or full text. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | ### S02 Hu et al. (2022): Effect of ginger in the treatment of nausea and vomiting compared with vitamin B6 and placebo during pregnancy: a meta-analysis [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31937153/) Materials actually read: Stored summary and bibliography read; external paper, registration and planning material unread Findings recorded in the summary: In 13 studies with 1,174 people, nausea versus placebo had SMD 0.821, 95% CI 0.585~1.056 and I²=38.9%. The null comparison against B6 is distinguished from placebo and does not prove equivalence. Formulations, doses, scales and methods vary; product-specific effects and exact sign conventions remain unverified. Record level: Retained pooled nausea result and active-comparator boundary; not a product-specific effect Independent replication: The inclusion relationship and overlap between the direct trial and meta-analysis remain unverified. The overall 120 allocated and 106 in the main analysis, selected direct comparison of 80 allocated and 73 analyzed, and pooled 13 studies with 1,174 people are not added together. Unique trials, participant totals and independent replications matching the product conditions remain unverified. | Material | Public availability | Access status | Actually read | Notes | |---|---|---|---|---| | Stored existing review summary | Existing stored summary acquired | Stored summary | Stored summary read | The stored existing evidence and bibliography summary was read. Hu Y et al. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2022;35:187-196. PMID: 31937153. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2020.1712714. Registration status in the original record remains unverified and no full-text copy is retained. Shared historical review wording is not inherited as current external reading of this report. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | External article, abstract and full text | Original bibliography link only; external content unread | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | Only the bibliographic article/abstract/full-text link is retained. External content is unread, with no access attempt. Registration status in the original record remains unverified and no full-text copy is retained. Shared historical review wording is not inherited as current external reading of this report. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Registration material | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | Original registration/changes and prespecified endpoints remain unread. Registration status in the original record remains unverified and no full-text copy is retained. Shared historical review wording is not inherited as current external reading of this report. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Protocol | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | The original protocol and its changes remain unread. Registration status in the original record remains unverified and no full-text copy is retained. Shared historical review wording is not inherited as current external reading of this report. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Statistical analysis plan (SAP) | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | The original prespecified statistical analysis plan and multiplicity plan remain unread. Registration status in the original record remains unverified and no full-text copy is retained. Shared historical review wording is not inherited as current external reading of this report. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | | Funding, product-support and conflict material | Needed material; existence and public availability unverified | Unread; no access attempt | Unread | Original funding, product-support, employee-authorship and conflict disclosures remain unread. Registration status in the original record remains unverified and no full-text copy is retained. Shared historical review wording is not inherited as current external reading of this report. The retained material date 2026-09-08 is the original verdict date, not an external-reading date for this work. The date 2026-10-06 is a production date, not a completed-review date. Current external access, acquisition and reading remain separately unverified. | ## 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. · Existing methodological links were reused for production. External originals were not reread and methodological content was not reassessed. - 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. · Existing methodological links were reused for production. External originals were not reread and methodological content was not reassessed. - 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. · Existing methodological links were reused for production. External originals were not reread and methodological content was not reassessed. - 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. · Existing methodological links were reused for production. External originals were not reread and methodological content was not reassessed. - 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. · Existing methodological links were reused for production. External originals were not reread and methodological content was not reassessed. ## What the statuses mean - Partly verified: Partial information from the stored summary is linked; detailed originals and content review remain incomplete. - Unverified: Required details cannot be established within the preserved scope. This does not establish absence of effects or studies, or safety. - Review incomplete: Review of existing content remains incomplete. - Met: This state is used only within the relevant conditions after material verification and content review. It was not automatically assigned in this work. - Not reported: Unreported within material actually read. Unread external material is not relabeled as unreported. - Inaccessible: This means actual access failure. External access was not attempted in this work, so this state was not assigned. - Not applicable: Used only with an application exception and reason based on the question scope. - Conflicting data: This requires actual comparison of materials; no new conflict judgment was made in this work. - Insufficient evidence for the conditions: This indicates gaps in additional material for the selected conditions. Unread material as a whole is not converted into an efficacy grade. ## Change history 2026-10-25 · Public page/materials 1.0. The public view and materials were prepared from the existing 34 items. No new clinical search, verification-state change or scoring was performed.