# A single 1-g preoperative dose of dried ginger powder × Reduction of nausea incidence within 24 postoperative hours Verdict 3049 · Evidence Check Stored-material review date: 2026-10-06 Original evidence cut-off: 2026-09-08 Review-criteria version: 1.1 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: ASA I–II adult women undergoing elective major gynecologic laparotomy under general anesthesia. Detailed eligibility and baseline nausea risk remain unverified. - Ingredient, formulation and route: Oral dried ginger powder from Zingiber officinale Roscoe rhizome. The Khao-la-o Laboratories product name is distinguished from verified supply, support or funding. - Dose: 2 capsules of 500 mg; a single 1 g dose 1 hour before surgery. Actual ingestion, adherence and timing deviations remain unverified. - Comparator: Appearance- and odor-matched lactose placebo with the same anesthesia and rescue care. Actual drugs, doses, arm-specific use and handling remain unverified. - Measured outcome: The proportion reporting any nausea within 24 postoperative hours. This is distinct from nausea episodes, scores, severity, vomiting and composite PONV. - Duration: A single preoperative administration with 24 hours of postoperative follow-up. Delayed nausea, long-term results and other populations are separate questions. - Questions outside this scope: Null statements about vomiting/composite PONV are not changed into an effect of 0 or equivalence for nausea incidence.; Nausea scores at 2, 6 and 12 hours differ in time and measure from the proportion affected within 24 hours.; Rescue-medication results are distinguished from claims of replacing prophylactic antiemetics.; Results from cesarean delivery or other surgery/anesthesia are not counted as independent same-condition replications.; Nausea prevention is not expanded into aspiration prevention, long-term safety or individual preoperative dosing advice.; The single 1 g dried-powder question is not converted into superiority claims about other formulations, doses or repeated regimens. ## Checklist items ### N01 · Which independent postoperative-nausea question is covered? Verification status: Met Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original question concerns ASA I–II adult women having major gynecologic laparotomy under general anesthesia, with 1 g of powder given once 1 h before surgery and nausea incidence assessed over 24 h. The selected endpoint is the proportion reporting any nausea. - Why unverified: The formulation, population, comparison, endpoint and time are identifiable in the retained original. - Reason for missing information: Prespecified primary (1st) status, the original CI and independent replication are separate from identifying this boundary. - Required materials and conditions: ASA I–II adult women; major gynecologic laparotomy/general anesthesia; 1 g given 1 h before surgery; placebo comparison of any nausea within 24 h - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for ASA I–II adult women; major gynecologic laparotomy/general anesthesia; 1 g given 1 h before surgery; placebo comparison of any nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for ASA I–II adult women; major gynecologic laparotomy/general anesthesia; 1 g given 1 h before surgery; placebo comparison of any nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Link the original question to the proportion reporting any nausea within 24 h. - Why this condition is needed: Link the original question to the proportion reporting any nausea within 24 h. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not combine nausea severity, vomiting, composite PONV or rescue medication into an independent primary effect. - Remaining uncertainty: Verification of question identity does not confirm efficacy. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N02 · Do the direct and synthesis reports count the same trials more than once? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The structured record contains the direct Nanthakomon 2006 report and the Chen 2022 review. The direct 120 participants and the review's 14 RCTs/1506 participants are not added together; unique trial and participant totals remain unverified. - Why unverified: Report identities are retained, but review inclusion, overlap and trial-family/team relationships remain unresolved. - Reason for missing information: Included trials, registration and unique trial-family/participant counts are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: The 2006 gynecologic-surgery report, the Chen 2022 review's inclusion table and trial identifiers - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The 2006 gynecologic-surgery report, the Chen 2022 review's inclusion table and trial identifiers. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The 2006 gynecologic-surgery report, the Chen 2022 review's inclusion table and trial identifiers. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish report/trial families for the direct 120 participants and the review's 14 RCTs/1506 participants without adding them together. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish report/trial families for the direct 120 participants and the review's 14 RCTs/1506 participants without adding them together. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not count a review, its original trials or repeated endpoint/time-point citations as independent replication. - Remaining uncertainty: 2 reports do not establish 2 independent studies or a combined participant total. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N03 · Are actual reading and the existence of external material distinguished? Verification status: Met Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The full retained record and report/bibliographic summaries were read. External PubMed pages/abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and SAPs were not opened. - Why unverified: Actual summary reading and unread external material are separated. - Reason for missing information: Public availability, acquisition and actual external contents remain unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Reading/acquisition histories for the retained record, PubMed bibliography/abstract, full text, registration, protocol and SAP - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Reading/acquisition histories for the retained record, PubMed bibliography/abstract, full text, registration, protocol and SAP. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Reading/acquisition histories for the retained record, PubMed bibliography/abstract, full text, registration, protocol and SAP. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Display current reading of the stored summary separately from unread external material. - Why this condition is needed: Display current reading of the stored summary separately from unread external material. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: A URL or the original verdict date does not establish full-text reading in this work. - Remaining uncertainty: The current record has no access-level field; historical verification dates are not used as new reading dates. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N04 · What surgery, anesthesia and adult-women population is covered? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original population is ASA I–II adult women having elective major gynecologic laparotomy under general anesthesia. Detailed eligibility/exclusion, baseline PONV risk and the anesthesia regimen are not provided in the summary. - Why unverified: Population, surgery and anesthesia names are retained; actual eligibility and baseline conditions need further material. - Reason for missing information: Eligibility/exclusion, baseline risk and detailed anesthesia are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Eligibility/exclusion for ASA I–II adult women undergoing elective major gynecologic laparotomy under general anesthesia - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Eligibility/exclusion for ASA I–II adult women undergoing elective major gynecologic laparotomy under general anesthesia. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Eligibility/exclusion for ASA I–II adult women undergoing elective major gynecologic laparotomy under general anesthesia. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish the direct population from cesarean delivery, other surgery/anesthesia, other sexes and baseline conditions. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish the direct population from cesarean delivery, other surgery/anesthesia, other sexes and baseline conditions. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: A shared postoperative-nausea label does not justify transfer to every population. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not automatically apply the result to cesarean delivery, other surgery/anesthesia or other populations. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N05 · What dried ginger-powder formulation and product specifications are recorded? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The formulation is 2 capsules of 500 mg dried ginger powder; the retained funding description names Khao-la-o Laboratories powder. Quantification/manufacturing specifications and the supply role lack detail. - Why unverified: Product/formulation identity is distinguished from standardization and support facts. - Reason for missing information: Ingredient quantification, manufacturing specifications and actual supply/support documents are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Rhizome, 2 capsules of 500 mg, Khao-la-o powder and ingredient quantification - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Rhizome, 2 capsules of 500 mg, Khao-la-o powder and ingredient quantification. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Rhizome, 2 capsules of 500 mg, Khao-la-o powder and ingredient quantification. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish the dried-powder formulation and brand wording from verification of standardization/product support. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish the dried-powder formulation and brand wording from verification of standardization/product support. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not turn a product name into evidence of an extract, company funding or free supply. - Remaining uncertainty: A brand name does not verify company funding, free supply or employee authorship. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N06 · Are a single 1 g dose 1 hour before surgery and follow-up distinguished? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original regimen is a single oral 1 g dose (2 capsules of 500 mg) given 1 hour before surgery, with 24 h follow-up. Actual ingestion, adherence and timing deviations are not established in the summary. - Why unverified: Nominal administration and follow-up are recorded; actual implementation remains unverified. - Reason for missing information: Actual administration records, adherence and deviations are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: One 1 g dose (2 capsules of 500 mg), given 1 h before surgery; 24 h follow-up; actual administration/adherence - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for One 1 g dose (2 capsules of 500 mg), given 1 h before surgery; 24 h follow-up; actual administration/adherence. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for One 1 g dose (2 capsules of 500 mg), given 1 h before surgery; 24 h follow-up; actual administration/adherence. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Record dose, timing and frequency separately from postoperative observation duration. - Why this condition is needed: Record dose, timing and frequency separately from postoperative observation duration. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not fill other doses or repeated regimens with the same effect estimate. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not copy the same effect to repeated dosing or other timings. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N07 · What placebo and common anesthesia/rescue treatment are described? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The comparison specifies appearance- and odor-matched lactose placebo and the same anesthesia/rescue care. Drugs, doses, actual use and arm-specific handling lack detail in the current summary. - Why unverified: A placebo/common-care statement is distinct from verifying actual concomitant treatment methods. - Reason for missing information: Anesthesia/rescue treatment, concomitant care and handling of arm-specific deviations are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Actual contents of appearance- and odor-matched lactose placebo and the same anesthesia/rescue care - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Actual contents of appearance- and odor-matched lactose placebo and the same anesthesia/rescue care. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Actual contents of appearance- and odor-matched lactose placebo and the same anesthesia/rescue care. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish planned common care from actual drugs, administration, rescue-treatment differences and handling. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish planned common care from actual drugs, administration, rescue-treatment differences and handling. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Matching appearance/odor does not verify every blinding procedure or every concomitant treatment. - Remaining uncertainty: Matching appearance/odor does not establish successful complete blinding or identical care throughout. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N08 · What outcome is nausea incidence within 24 hours? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The selected endpoint is the proportion reporting any nausea within 24 h. The direct summary assigns 29/60 versus 40/60 and P=.042 to this outcome. - Why unverified: The incidence contract and reported values are retained; collection/definition and prespecification details remain unresolved. - Reason for missing information: Original collection methods, prespecified hierarchy and denominator status are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Definition and collection of the proportion reporting any nausea within 24 h - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Definition and collection of the proportion reporting any nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Definition and collection of the proportion reporting any nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish events/denominators for a patient proportion from nausea episodes, scores and vomiting. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish events/denominators for a patient proportion from nausea episodes, scores and vomiting. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: The page's selected endpoint does not establish that it was a preregistered primary (1st) endpoint. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not equate this with nausea episodes, severity, vomiting or composite PONV. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N09 · Are scores/severity at 2, 6 and 12 hours the same outcome? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The review reports a positive direction in nausea scores at 2, 6 and 12 h, while the Korean narrative describes reduced nausea severity. These measures/time points differ from the proportion affected within 24 h. - Why unverified: Time-specific score directions are retained; scales, denominators and trial-specific original results remain unverified. - Reason for missing information: Score/severity definitions, times and included-trial estimates are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Definitions, denominators and scales for the review's nausea scores/severity at 2/6/12 h - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Definitions, denominators and scales for the review's nausea scores/severity at 2/6/12 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Definitions, denominators and scales for the review's nausea scores/severity at 2/6/12 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Attribute positive time-specific score directions to a measure distinct from the proportion affected within 24 h. - Why this condition is needed: Attribute positive time-specific score directions to a measure distinct from the proportion affected within 24 h. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not turn scores into 24 h event counts or effects from the direct original trial. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not transfer scores into direct 24 h event counts or effect estimates. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R02 ### N10 · Are vomiting, composite PONV and rescue-medication outcomes separated? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The review summary reports null incidence results for vomiting, composite PONV and rescue medication; the Korean narrative describes these as mostly null. They remain separate endpoints from nausea incidence within 24 h. - Why unverified: Unfavorable/no-difference directions for other endpoints are retained; endpoint-specific estimates and times remain unverified. - Reason for missing information: Definitions, denominators and estimates for vomiting/composite/rescue outcomes are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Definitions, times and denominators for each outcome, and the review's null-result statements - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Definitions, times and denominators for each outcome, and the review's null-result statements. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Definitions, times and denominators for each outcome, and the review's null-result statements. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Retain nausea-benefit statements alongside null statements for other endpoints. - Why this condition is needed: Retain nausea-benefit statements alongside null statements for other endpoints. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not replace null/nonsignificant findings with an effect of 0, equivalence or absence of a nausea result within 24 h. - Remaining uncertainty: A null statement is not an effect of 0, equivalence or denial of the nausea-incidence benefit within 24 h. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R02 ### N11 · What denominators do 120 participants, 60/60 and 29/60 versus 40/60 represent? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original sample is 120 participants, 60/60, with nausea within 24 h in 29/60 versus 40/60. Detailed flow is needed to establish whether allocated, completed, measured and analyzed denominators coincide. - Why unverified: Only stored event counts/denominators are retained; further participant counts or denominator meanings are not established. - Reason for missing information: Actual allocated/completed/observed/analyzed counts and participant flow are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Allocated/completed/analyzed participants and patients experiencing nausea within 24 h - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Allocated/completed/analyzed participants and patients experiencing nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Allocated/completed/analyzed participants and patients experiencing nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Retain the original 120 participants, 60/60 and 29/60 versus 40/60 at the reported level. - Why this condition is needed: Retain the original 120 participants, 60/60 and 29/60 versus 40/60 at the reported level. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not assume all allocated, completed, measured and analyzed denominators are identical. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not read event counts as nausea episodes or denominators for all harms. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N12 · Are missing data, withdrawals and analysis handling verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current summary does not specify arm-specific withdrawals, follow-up loss, missing-data handling, analysis populations or sensitivity analyses within 24 h. - Why unverified: The 60/60 notation and generic English participant wording cannot establish complete follow-up or analysis handling. - Reason for missing information: Actual flow/missing-data handling is unspecified in the retained record; full text/SAP remain unread. - Required materials and conditions: Arm-specific observation loss within 24 h, withdrawal reasons, analysis populations and handling - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Arm-specific observation loss within 24 h, withdrawal reasons, analysis populations and handling. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Arm-specific observation loss within 24 h, withdrawal reasons, analysis populations and handling. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Identify the need to verify actual follow-up/completion and missing-data handling beyond the original event denominators. - Why this condition is needed: Identify the need to verify actual follow-up/completion and missing-data handling beyond the original event denominators. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: No withdrawal/missing-data information does not establish 0 losses or complete follow-up. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not fill missing details with 0 withdrawals, complete follow-up or ITT. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N13 · Is the stored RR of about 0.725 an original-paper estimate? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original evidence and bibliography record 29/60 versus 40/60, P=.042 and a calculated RR of about 0.725, with the original 95% CI unverified. This RR is a retained historical calculation, not a new calculation in this work. - Why unverified: Reported events, P and the provenance level of the existing calculation are distinguished; the original reported interval remains unresolved. - Reason for missing information: The original estimate/95% CI and direct linkage to the historical calculation receipt are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: 29/60 versus 40/60, P=.042 and the calculated-RR label in the original evidence/bibliography - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for 29/60 versus 40/60, P=.042 and the calculated-RR label in the original evidence/bibliography. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for 29/60 versus 40/60, P=.042 and the calculated-RR label in the original evidence/bibliography. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Label the RR of about 0.725 only as a stored historical calculation and retain the unverified original 95% CI. - Why this condition is needed: Label the RR of about 0.725 only as a stored historical calculation and retain the unverified original 95% CI. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not calculate a new RR/RD/NNT/CI or promote the stored value to an original-paper estimate. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not promote this to an original-paper RR or calculate a new RR/RD/NNT/CI. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N14 · How are other surgery and cesarean-delivery findings retained? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The Korean/English narratives describe very low certainty and an unestablished nausea benefit in a cesarean-only Cochrane analysis. The structured bibliography contains no separate Cochrane citation or inclusion table. - Why unverified: Opposing/uncertain background is retained without counting it as direct replication under the same surgery/anesthesia. - Reason for missing information: The cesarean citation, surgery/anesthesia-specific included trials and exact results are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Other surgery/anesthesia, cesarean-only Cochrane statements and differences from the direct question - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Other surgery/anesthesia, cesarean-only Cochrane statements and differences from the direct question. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Other surgery/anesthesia, cesarean-only Cochrane statements and differences from the direct question. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Keep cesarean-only statements of very low certainty and unestablished nausea benefit in a separate context. - Why this condition is needed: Keep cesarean-only statements of very low certainty and unestablished nausea benefit in a separate context. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not add other surgeries as independent replications under the same gynecologic laparotomy/general-anesthesia conditions. - Remaining uncertainty: A result from other surgery does not establish a conflict on the identical direct gynecologic-laparotomy question within 24 h. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N15 · What do the Korean 2021 narrative, Chen 2022 citation and dates mean? Verification status: Met Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original verdict date 2026-09-08, correction date 2026-09-14 and Korean/English narrative about two 2021 meta-analyses are retained. The explicit citation is Chen 2022; no collection year was inferred. New clinical searches in this work: 0. - Why unverified: Narrative year, citation year, original verdict date and current review are distinguished. - Reason for missing information: Complete bibliographic links for the two 2021 narrative references and current publication/retraction status are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: The Korean/English narrative about two 2021 meta-analyses, the explicit Chen 2022 citation and original verdict/correction dates - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The Korean/English narrative about two 2021 meta-analyses, the explicit Chen 2022 citation and original verdict/correction dates. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The Korean/English narrative about two 2021 meta-analyses, the explicit Chen 2022 citation and original verdict/correction dates. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Retain narrative years and citation publication years without inferring collection years or additional reports. - Why this condition is needed: Retain narrative years and citation publication years without inferring collection years or additional reports. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: No new search does not mean 0 studies or verification of current publication/retraction status. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not invent further studies/reports beyond the 2 explicit citations. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N16 · How far are research funding sources verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The direct funding description says the funding source is unverified; the review describes mixed original-trial funding. The Khao-la-o brand or historical I1 axis is not an original declaration of independent funding. - Why unverified: Specific sources/company roles remain unverified beyond report-specific funding statements. - Reason for missing information: Original funding/company-role documents are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: The direct trial's funding/company role and funding of original trials in the review - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The direct trial's funding/company role and funding of original trials in the review. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The direct trial's funding/company role and funding of original trials in the review. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish the direct trial's unverified funding source from mixed funding statements about the review's original trials. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish the direct trial's unverified funding source from mixed funding statements about the review's original trials. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Historical I1 or a product name does not verify independent funding. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not fill the gap with confirmed independent funding or confirmed company funding. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N17 · Are product supply and support verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original funding description names Khao-la-o Laboratories powder but does not specify actual supply/free-support scope or roles. - Why unverified: A product name is distinguished from verification of provision/support. - Reason for missing information: Original product-supply/support/company-role documents are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Declarations about Khao-la-o powder supply, free provision and roles - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Declarations about Khao-la-o powder supply, free provision and roles. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Declarations about Khao-la-o powder supply, free provision and roles. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Record the product brand separately from actual supply/support scope. - Why this condition is needed: Record the product brand separately from actual supply/support scope. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: A named product does not establish free supply or absence of support. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not replace this with no support or confirmed free supply. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N18 · Are employee authorship and research teams verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The retained summary contains no concrete finding on company employment, affiliations or author contributions. The English funding description only contains generic wording about separate assessment of employee authorship and related matters. - Why unverified: There is no original record verifying employee-authorship presence/absence or independent-team relationships. - Reason for missing information: Author employment, affiliations and team relationships are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Author affiliations, company employment and team/report-family relationships - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Author affiliations, company employment and team/report-family relationships. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Author affiliations, company employment and team/report-family relationships. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Do not use generic English wording to fill employee-authorship or independent-team presence/absence. - Why this condition is needed: Do not use generic English wording to fill employee-authorship or independent-team presence/absence. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: A review's repeated direction does not establish same-condition replication by a different independent research team. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not promote a review's repeated direction into verified independent teams or same-condition replication. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N19 · How far are declared conflicts and patents verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current retained record lacks detailed original conflict-of-interest/patent declarations. Generic English funding wording and I1 are retained without treating them as declaration documents. - Why unverified: Presence or absence of conflicts cannot be established without comparing original declarations and their scope. - Reason for missing information: Declared conflicts, patents and institutional roles are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Author/institution declarations of interests, patents and product roles - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Author/institution declarations of interests, patents and product roles. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Author/institution declarations of interests, patents and product roles. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Do not label unread/unverified declarations as no conflicts or no bias. - Why this condition is needed: Do not label unread/unverified declarations as no conflicts or no bias. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Historical axes, brands and generic English funding wording do not replace declaration documents. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not invent no conflicts, no bias or a new independence grade. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N20 · What randomization, concealment and blinding were actually used? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The direct study is described as randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled, with appearance- and odor-matched lactose placebo. Sequence generation, concealment, actual assessor blinding and baseline-risk details are absent. - Why unverified: The design label/placebo features are retained; actual allocation/blinding methods still need comparison. - Reason for missing information: Random sequence generation, concealment, blinding and baseline balance are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Sequence generation, concealment, assessors and baseline differences in the double-blind placebo trial - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Sequence generation, concealment, assessors and baseline differences in the double-blind placebo trial. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Sequence generation, concealment, assessors and baseline differences in the double-blind placebo trial. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish the design label from actual method verification and retain unverified limitations. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish the design label from actual method verification and retain unverified limitations. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Matched placebo appearance/odor does not verify every blinding procedure. - Remaining uncertainty: A design label or matched odor does not establish absence of bias. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N21 · Could anesthesia, prophylaxis or rescue-care differences obscure the intervention's contribution? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original comparison states the same anesthesia/rescue care. Actual administration, arm-specific use and handling of anesthetics, prophylactic antiemetics and rescue medication lack detail. - Why unverified: A common-care statement is separate from differences/deviations in actual concurrent interventions. - Reason for missing information: Drugs, administration, rescue use and adherence/analysis handling are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Arm-specific anesthetics, prophylactic antiemetics, rescue care, adherence/deviations and handling - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Arm-specific anesthetics, prophylactic antiemetics, rescue care, adherence/deviations and handling. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Arm-specific anesthetics, prophylactic antiemetics, rescue care, adherence/deviations and handling. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish a same-anesthesia/rescue-care statement from unverified actual administration and analysis backgrounds. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish a same-anesthesia/rescue-care statement from unverified actual administration and analysis backgrounds. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not transfer rescue endpoints or concomitant-treatment differences into the effect of ginger alone. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not turn rescue-medication results or concomitant-treatment differences into a ginger-only effect. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N22 · Who collected nausea, when and with which scale? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current scope specifies the proportion reporting any nausea within 24 h. The summary lacks detail on who assessed it, when, which question/scale was used and assessor blinding/recall. - Why unverified: The incidence definition is retained; actual measurement procedures and missingness remain unresolved. - Reason for missing information: Assessors, collection times, scales and recall/blinding are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Questions, assessor blinding, visits, recall and severity measurement for any nausea within 24 h - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Questions, assessor blinding, visits, recall and severity measurement for any nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Questions, assessor blinding, visits, recall and severity measurement for any nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Attribute patient incidence and score/severity measures to their actual collection methods. - Why this condition is needed: Attribute patient incidence and score/severity measures to their actual collection methods. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not fill unread details with complete collection, objective measurement or validated scales. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not substitute incidence, severity and scores or assume complete collection. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N23 · Which intervention effect does the 24 h analysis estimate? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: Event comparisons are reported, but assignment/adherence effects, ITT/PP, adjustment and actual analysis populations/models are not specified in the retained summary. - Why unverified: An event denominator of 60 cannot establish the analysis plan or effect of interest. - Reason for missing information: The effect of interest, analysis plan, populations and models are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Assignment/adherence effects, ITT/PP, adjustment and analysis populations/models - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Assignment/adherence effects, ITT/PP, adjustment and analysis populations/models. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Assignment/adherence effects, ITT/PP, adjustment and analysis populations/models. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish reported event comparisons from verification of actual analysis definitions. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish reported event comparisons from verification of actual analysis definitions. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: A denominator of 60 does not justify choosing ITT/PP or performing a new analysis. - Remaining uncertainty: New reanalyses or arbitrary ITT/PP designations: 0. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N24 · Was nausea alone a prespecified primary (1st) endpoint? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original reader answer says prespecified primary (1st) status for nausea alone is unverified; trial registration is recorded as unverified. - Why unverified: The current nausea outcome within 24 h is distinguished from a preregistered hierarchy; comparison material remains needed. - Reason for missing information: Original registration, protocol, SAP and prespecified endpoints/multiplicity are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Endpoints, times and multiplicity in direct-trial registration, protocol and SAP - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Endpoints, times and multiplicity in direct-trial registration, protocol and SAP. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Endpoints, times and multiplicity in direct-trial registration, protocol and SAP. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Retain the selected nausea outcome within 24 h alongside unverified prespecified primary (1st) status. - Why this condition is needed: Retain the selected nausea outcome within 24 h alongside unverified prespecified primary (1st) status. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: A reported significant P does not prove a prespecified primary (1st) success. - Remaining uncertainty: Neither a significant P nor the page's selected endpoint proves a prespecified primary (1st) success. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N25 · Are the original between-group 95% CI and precision verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original result records P=.042 and an existing calculated RR of about 0.725; the original 95% CI remains unverified. - Why unverified: Without the original reported interval, precision and the range of compatible effect sizes cannot be established. - Reason for missing information: The direct original effect, 95% CI and variance/denominator definitions are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: The reported direct effect, 95% CI, variance and denominator for nausea within 24 h - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The reported direct effect, 95% CI, variance and denominator for nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The reported direct effect, 95% CI, variance and denominator for nausea within 24 h. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish P=.042 and the existing RR calculation from the unverified original interval. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish P=.042 and the existing RR calculation from the unverified original interval. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: New intervals calculated from event counts or precision claims from a sample of 120 alone: 0. - Remaining uncertainty: New CI calculations or precision judgments from 120 participants alone: 0. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N26 · What defines clinical importance of the incidence difference? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current retained record has no justified clinical-importance threshold or original interval for a difference in nausea incidence within 24 h in this surgery/anesthesia and population. - Why unverified: Material to compare the reported interval with clinical-importance evidence remains unverified. - Reason for missing information: Clinical-importance criteria and the original interval are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Clinical-importance criteria and reported intervals for the relevant surgery/anesthesia and population - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Clinical-importance criteria and reported intervals for the relevant surgery/anesthesia and population. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Clinical-importance criteria and reported intervals for the relevant surgery/anesthesia and population. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Do not invent a minimum difference or sufficiency threshold without justified criteria and an interval. - Why this condition is needed: Do not invent a minimum difference or sufficiency threshold without justified criteria and an interval. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not create individual preoperative dosing instructions or recommend replacing prophylactic drugs. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not invent minimum differences, sufficiency or individual dosing/prophylaxis-replacement recommendations. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N27 · Is there independent replication for the same surgery, anesthesia, formulation and nausea outcome within 24 h? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original narrative leaves same-condition independent replication unverified. The review's 14 RCTs do not establish 14 replications with the same surgery/anesthesia, endpoint and time. - Why unverified: Trial-specific conditions, registration/families and team identities are not retained. - Reason for missing information: Same-condition trials/teams and the distribution of trial-specific results are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Original-trial families, research teams and trial-specific results matching the conditions - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Original-trial families, research teams and trial-specific results matching the conditions. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Original-trial families, research teams and trial-specific results matching the conditions. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish a review's repeated direction from unverified independent replication under the same conditions. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish a review's repeated direction from unverified independent replication under the same conditions. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not count 14 RCTs as 14 independent same-condition replications. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not add an original trial to a review or to score results at other times. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N28 · Does the evidence establish other doses, repeated dosing or optimal timing? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current direct question is a single 1 g powder dose given 1 h before surgery. The retained summary contains no direct superiority comparison of doses, timings or repeated regimens of the same formulation. - Why unverified: The selected regimen is separated from extension claims about optimal conditions. - Reason for missing information: Direct dose/timing/repeated-regimen comparisons are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Direct dose/timing and repeated-regimen comparisons using the same powder formulation - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Direct dose/timing and repeated-regimen comparisons using the same powder formulation. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Direct dose/timing and repeated-regimen comparisons using the same powder formulation. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Separate the current single 1 g dose given 1 h before surgery from optimal-dose/timing claims. - Why this condition is needed: Separate the current single 1 g dose given 1 h before surgery from optimal-dose/timing claims. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not rank dose effects across different studies as direct superiority comparisons. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not interpret dose effects from different studies as direct superiority evidence. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N29 · Does the evidence answer outcomes beyond 24 h or in other populations? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: Follow-up is 24 h, and the original narrative rejects equal benefit in every surgery. Delayed nausea, long-term outcomes and special-population follow-up are unverified in the summary. - Why unverified: The acute time window is distinguished from gaps in extension questions. - Reason for missing information: Direct follow-up beyond 24 h or in other populations/anesthesia is unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Delayed nausea after cessation, long-term outcomes, special populations and other anesthesia - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Delayed nausea after cessation, long-term outcomes, special populations and other anesthesia. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Delayed nausea after cessation, long-term outcomes, special populations and other anesthesia. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Separate acute observation over 24 h from gaps about persistence, harms and other populations. - Why this condition is needed: Separate acute observation over 24 h from gaps about persistence, harms and other populations. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not require every long-term question as a necessary condition for the narrow question within 24 h. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not force every long-term trial question into the narrow acute question. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N30 · Does a nausea result establish vomiting/aspiration prevention or replacement of prophylaxis? Verification status: Met Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original scope note assesses nausea incidence within 24 h and separates vomiting/composite PONV. The advertising limits exclude prophylactic-antiemetic replacement, vomiting/aspiration prevention and equal effects in every surgery. - Why unverified: The boundary between the selected symptom and separate event/drug-replacement questions is explicitly retained. - Reason for missing information: Direct aspiration/prophylaxis-replacement results are unverified within this scope. - Required materials and conditions: Direct outcomes for nausea incidence, vomiting, aspiration and prophylaxis replacement - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Direct outcomes for nausea incidence, vomiting, aspiration and prophylaxis replacement. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Direct outcomes for nausea incidence, vomiting, aspiration and prophylaxis replacement. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Do not expand a selected symptom result into clinical-event prevention or drug replacement. - Why this condition is needed: Do not expand a selected symptom result into clinical-event prevention or drug replacement. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not automatically require aspiration-event trials to identify the nausea question within 24 h. - Remaining uncertainty: This verification does not establish extended efficacy or safety. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N31 · Which harms were collected in the direct trial? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current retained record provides preoperative caution wording and nausea-prevention results but no detailed table of ginger-attributed adverse-event definitions, collection or discontinuation. - Why unverified: Reduced nausea is different evidence from harm collection or a complete safety tally. - Reason for missing information: Direct harm details are unspecified in the retained record; external full text remains unread. - Required materials and conditions: Adverse-event definitions, collection and discontinuation around surgery after a single 1 g powder dose - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Adverse-event definitions, collection and discontinuation around surgery after a single 1 g powder dose. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Adverse-event definitions, collection and discontinuation around surgery after a single 1 g powder dose. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Separate nausea-prevention efficacy from collection of ginger-attributed harms. - Why this condition is needed: Separate nausea-prevention efficacy from collection of ginger-attributed harms. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: An efficacy table or caution advice does not replace a complete adverse-event tally. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not expand this to 0 harms, safety or whole-paper nonreporting. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N32 · What level of information is the fasting/aspiration caution? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original safety advice prioritizes the anesthesia/surgical team's judgment about fasting/aspiration risk and says not to self-administer. Actual aspiration events and incidence denominators are absent from the summary. - Why unverified: The caution is retained separately from risk incidence or aspiration-prevention efficacy. - Reason for missing information: Fasting/administration records and aspiration events, denominators and timing are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Original fasting/aspiration caution, actual administration, aspiration events and anesthesia-team decisions - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Original fasting/aspiration caution, actual administration, aspiration events and anesthesia-team decisions. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Original fasting/aspiration caution, actual administration, aspiration events and anesthesia-team decisions. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Do not turn caution advice into a risk incidence or ginger's aspiration-prevention effect. - Why this condition is needed: Do not turn caution advice into a risk incidence or ginger's aspiration-prevention effect. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not transfer the trial dose into instructions to self-administer before surgery. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not turn the trial dose into personal preoperative dosing instructions. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N33 · Are harms with anticoagulant/antiplatelet use verified? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The original advice prioritizes the surgical team's judgment for anticoagulant/antiplatelet use. Actual bleeding/interactions and concomitant-use denominators are unverified in the retained summary. - Why unverified: Advice is different from verified effects or incidence of harms during concomitant use. - Reason for missing information: Direct event/exposure data on concomitant drugs, baseline risk and bleeding/interactions are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Concomitant drugs, baseline risk, bleeding/interactions and exposure data - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Concomitant drugs, baseline risk, bleeding/interactions and exposure data. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Concomitant drugs, baseline risk, bleeding/interactions and exposure data. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish original caution advice from unverified interaction/harm magnitudes. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish original caution advice from unverified interaction/harm magnitudes. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not estimate new bleeding rates or interaction effects or establish safety. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not infer risk magnitude, interaction effects or safety. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N34 · Are harm denominators and observation losses verified? Verification status: Unverified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: Beyond the nausea event denominators of 29/60 versus 40/60, the current summary provides no overall harm, bleeding or aspiration events/exposure time or collection losses. - Why unverified: An efficacy-endpoint denominator does not replace an incidence denominator for a separate harm. - Reason for missing information: Harm-specific events, denominators, time and collection/follow-up losses are unverified. - Required materials and conditions: Arm-specific people/events with harms, exposure time, collection, missingness and discontinuation - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Arm-specific people/events with harms, exposure time, collection, missingness and discontinuation. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Arm-specific people/events with harms, exposure time, collection, missingness and discontinuation. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Distinguish nausea event denominators from denominators for overall harms, bleeding or aspiration incidence. - Why this condition is needed: Distinguish nausea event denominators from denominators for overall harms, bleeding or aspiration incidence. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not read 29/60 versus 40/60 as denominators/incidence for ginger-attributed adverse effects. - Remaining uncertainty: Do not reverse nausea-prevention event counts into frequencies of ginger-attributed adverse effects. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01 ### N35 · Are efficacy comparisons distinguished from harm signals and causation? Verification status: Met Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: The current comparison concerns nausea-prevention efficacy against placebo. Original C46, caution, the historical I1/axes and cross-check wording are retained without converting them into ginger-caused nausea or a new safety judgment. - Why unverified: The direction of efficacy versus harm signals/causation and current interpretation limits are distinguished. - Reason for missing information: Separate harm comparisons, denominators, times and alternative causes remain unverified under the relevant conditions. - Required materials and conditions: The placebo comparison of nausea within 24 h and separate harm, timing, alternative-cause and safety scopes - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The placebo comparison of nausea within 24 h and separate harm, timing, alternative-cause and safety scopes. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for The placebo comparison of nausea within 24 h and separate harm, timing, alternative-cause and safety scopes. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Do not reverse comparative nausea reduction into a signal that ginger causes nausea. - Why this condition is needed: Do not reverse comparative nausea reduction into a signal that ginger causes nausea. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not use historical C46/caution/cross-check wording as a new efficacy/safety grade or independent clinical certification. - Remaining uncertainty: Model self-review and original-byte/hash checks do not establish independent clinical certification. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N36 · Are review PROSPERO registration and direct-trial registration distinguished? Verification status: Partly verified Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: Direct-trial registration is unverified. PROSPERO CRD42020220916 in the Chen review citation is retained as review registration and is not used as preregistration of the original 2006 trial. - Why unverified: Review/direct-trial identity levels are distinguished; actual registration/plan comparison remains unresolved. - Reason for missing information: Original-trial registration, review-registration contents/inclusion tables and protocols/SAPs remain unread. - Required materials and conditions: Unverified direct-trial registration, Chen review CRD42020220916 and linked plans - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Unverified direct-trial registration, Chen review CRD42020220916 and linked plans. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Unverified direct-trial registration, Chen review CRD42020220916 and linked plans. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Do not substitute a review registration number for preregistration/endpoints of the original gynecologic trial. - Why this condition is needed: Do not substitute a review registration number for preregistration/endpoints of the original gynecologic trial. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Unacquired registration information does not prove nonregistration or selective reporting. - Remaining uncertainty: Unacquired material does not establish nonregistration or selective reporting. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ### N37 · What information do generic English evidence-table wording, past corrections and the two languages provide? Verification status: Met Reading scope: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. - Current findings: Generic participant/funding/endpoint/result/weight wording remains in the current English evidence table; the correction reports replacement of 2 fields. The Korean/English text and correction statement are preserved in the original. - Why unverified: Generic wording is distinguished from the actual original summary without using it as new denominator/company/result verification. - Reason for missing information: Details absent from generic wording remain unverified under the relevant conditions. - Required materials and conditions: Generic original English participant/funding/endpoint/result/weight wording and the correction statement dated 2026-09-14 - Materials to obtain first: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Generic original English participant/funding/endpoint/result/weight wording and the correction statement dated 2026-09-14. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. - Further research: Material needed: Original reports, plans and linked documents for Generic original English participant/funding/endpoint/result/weight wording and the correction statement dated 2026-09-14. First establish whether currently unverified material exists and has been acquired. This records needed materials; no new research was executed. - Conditions for verification: Retain actual Korean/English values and the correction statement; do not use generic wording as new verification of denominators, company relationships or results. - Why this condition is needed: Retain actual Korean/English values and the correction statement; do not use generic wording as new verification of denominators, company relationships or results. Without this distinction, populations, endpoints and denominators for the selected nausea outcome within 24 h could be mixed with other results. - Application exceptions: Do not overwrite retained English evidence or record a new correction/reassessment because of the reader translation. - Remaining uncertainty: Retain generic English and past corrections in the original; do not label a new reader translation as a correction applied to the original verdict. - Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, formulation, dose, timing, endpoint, comparison, denominators, overlap, support and harms in the retained reports. Detailed conditions are Chamgap's own application. - Related sources: R01, R02 ## Evidence and sources ### R01 Nanthakomon·Pongrojpaw (2006): The efficacy of ginger in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after major gynecologic surgery [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17725149/) Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. Findings recorded in the summary: 29/60 versus 40/60, P=.042; a retained calculated RR of about 0.725, with the original 95% CI unverified Record level: Reported values and limitations from the retained summary; not results of new external reading or calculations. Independent replication: The 120 participants/60/60 in the 2006 direct report and the 14 RCTs/1506 participants in the 2022 review are not added together. Included trials, overlap, independent teams under the same conditions and unique participant counts remain unverified. | Material | Public availability | Access status | Actually read | Notes | |---|---|---|---|---| | Retained research/bibliographic summary | Retained existing summary acquired | Current retained local input acquired | True | The full retained record was read and this report's summary/bibliography was identified at exact locations. Nanthakomon T, Pongrojpaw D. J Med Assoc Thai. 2006;89 Suppl 4:S130-S136. PMID: 17725149. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | External article abstract | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Access not attempted; unread | False | The stored URL exists; actual external bibliography/abstract readings in this work: 0. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | External article full text | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Full text not acquired; unread | False | A DOI, where present, serves only as a retained identifier/link and does not establish full-text reading. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Direct-trial registration original | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Original registration unread | False | Review PROSPERO identity is separated from unverified original-trial registration; neither nonregistration nor prespecified endpoints are established. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Protocol material needed (existence unverified) | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Existence/public availability/acquisition unverified; unread | False | The absence of a current link/original does not establish no protocol or selective reporting. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Statistical-analysis-plan material needed (existence unverified) | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Existence/public availability/acquisition unverified; unread | False | No current analysis-plan comparison was performed; ITT/PP/prespecified hierarchy are not inferred. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Product specification/supply/support material needed | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Existence/public availability/acquisition unverified; unread | False | Product identity/dose remain at the original-record level; separate original documents are needed for quantification/company supply. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Funding/employee-authorship/conflict material needed | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Existence/public availability/acquisition unverified; unread | False | Funding, support, employee authorship and declared conflicts are separately unverified; generic English wording/historical axes do not upgrade them. The direct trial's original interval, prespecified endpoints, funding, supply and independent replication remain unverified. A product name is not verification of actual support. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | ### R02 Chen and colleagues (2022): The preventive and relieving effects of ginger on postoperative nausea and vomiting: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34700257/) Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific conditions/application records were read. Linked external abstracts, full texts, registration and planning material remain unread, with no access attempt. Findings recorded in the summary: Positive nausea-score direction at 2, 6 and 12 hours; null incidence findings for vomiting, composite PONV and rescue medication Record level: Reported values and limitations from the retained summary; not results of new external reading or calculations. Independent replication: The 120 participants/60/60 in the 2006 direct report and the 14 RCTs/1506 participants in the 2022 review are not added together. Included trials, overlap, independent teams under the same conditions and unique participant counts remain unverified. | Material | Public availability | Access status | Actually read | Notes | |---|---|---|---|---| | Retained research/bibliographic summary | Retained existing summary acquired | Current retained local input acquired | True | The full retained record was read and this report's summary/bibliography was identified at exact locations. Chen CC et al. Complement Ther Med. 2022;64:102812. PMID: 34700257. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2021.102812. PROSPERO CRD42020220916. CRD42020220916 is a bibliographic review-registration identifier; it does not establish preregistration of the 2006 original trial or current reading of registration contents. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | External article abstract | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Access not attempted; unread | False | The stored URL exists; actual external bibliography/abstract readings in this work: 0. CRD42020220916 is a bibliographic review-registration identifier; it does not establish preregistration of the 2006 original trial or current reading of registration contents. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | External article full text | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Full text not acquired; unread | False | A DOI, where present, serves only as a retained identifier/link and does not establish full-text reading. CRD42020220916 is a bibliographic review-registration identifier; it does not establish preregistration of the 2006 original trial or current reading of registration contents. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Review-registration original | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Original registration unread | False | Review PROSPERO identity is separated from unverified original-trial registration; neither nonregistration nor prespecified endpoints are established. CRD42020220916 is a bibliographic review-registration identifier; it does not establish preregistration of the 2006 original trial or current reading of registration contents. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Protocol material needed (existence unverified) | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Existence/public availability/acquisition unverified; unread | False | The absence of a current link/original does not establish no protocol or selective reporting. CRD42020220916 is a bibliographic review-registration identifier; it does not establish preregistration of the 2006 original trial or current reading of registration contents. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | | Statistical-analysis-plan material needed (existence unverified) | External material; existence/public availability/acquisition separately unverified | Existence/public availability/acquisition unverified; unread | False | No current analysis-plan comparison was performed; ITT/PP/prespecified hierarchy are not inferred. CRD42020220916 is a bibliographic review-registration identifier; it does not establish preregistration of the 2006 original trial or current reading of registration contents. The material-review record dated 2026-10-06 concerns the retained summary. The separate condition 1.1 reapplication that day is not external full-text reading. The original verdict date 2026-09-08 and correction date 2026-09-14 are not changed into new-search or full-text-reading dates. | ## 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. · Retained method-application records were reused. External originals were not reread and method 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. · Retained method-application records were reused. External originals were not reread and method 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. · Retained method-application records were reused. External originals were not reread and method 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. · Retained method-application records were reused. External originals were not reread and method 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. · Retained method-application records were reused. External originals were not reread and method 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: The selected condition for material, identity or preservation was verified; this does not establish efficacy success or independent clinical validation. - 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 37 items. No new clinical search, verification-state change or scoring was performed.