Lotus leaf tea or defined lotus leaf infusion × Reduction of systolic blood pressure in adults with hypertension

Required evidence, verification status and materials actually read
Item	AVerification status	BReading scope	CReview item	DCurrent findings	EWhy unverified	FRequired materials and conditions	GFurther research
1	Met	Full text not readStored summary read	N01 · Evidence conditionWhich original claim and boundaries does this table convert?Required	The original claim is reduced systolic blood pressure in adults with hypertension. It is limited to oral consumption of a single lotus leaf tea or defined hot-water infusion; body-fat, in vitro ACE, seed, alkaloid and intravenous animal results are excluded. S01 S02	The original claim and table inclusion/exclusion boundaries are connected to the retained manuscript. This does not mean a direct blood-pressure effect was verified.	Canonical claim, plant part, route, population, endpoint, exclusions and original record locations	If the manuscript boundary changes, preserve the whole previous manuscript and compare the independent question again.
2	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N02 · Evidence conditionCan an actual controlled human blood-pressure trial matching this boundary be identified?Required	The retained reader answer and evidence table record that no directly eligible controlled human blood-pressure trial was identified. The Ye body-fat trial and in vitro ACE material are excluded for different reasons. S01 S02	A directly eligible comparison is unverified in this retained input. No new search was conducted; this does not establish the absence of all human studies.	Trial report and identity matching the exact plant part, formulation, population, blood-pressure endpoint and comparator	In subsequent material selection, compare each report with this eligibility boundary and retain exclusion reasons.
3	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N03 · Evidence conditionCan the botanical identity and leaf history of the actual blood-pressure trial product be verified?Required	The original claim conditions specify Nelumbo nucifera leaves, but exact cultivar, origin and harvest timing are unverified. Product identification material for a direct blood-pressure trial is also not retained. S01 S02	The question concerns the actual direct-trial product. Naming the intended leaf does not establish its history.	Botanical identification, plant part, batch, cultivar, origin and harvest records for the direct-trial product	Compare product specifications with the trial report and distinguish leaf identity from unverified history.
4	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N04 · Evidence conditionWhat formulation and manufacturing conditions were actually consumed in the blood-pressure trial?Required	The original formulation is tea or a defined hot-water infusion; the eligible trial formulation is unverified. The manuscript excludes importing hot-water-extract capsules, body-fat beverages or mixed teas. S01 S02	No material verifies actual manufacture, batch or mixed ingredients in a direct blood-pressure trial.	Manufacturing specifications, infusion conditions, batch testing and full ingredient list for the direct blood-pressure trial	Compare the trial formulation with the drinking boundary and record differences from ordinary tea, capsules and combination products.
5	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N05 · Evidence conditionAre dose and drinking schedule in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?Required	The dose in a directly eligible controlled trial is unverified. The 1–2 g lotus-leaf hot-water extract and 400 mL in the original key explanation describe only the body-fat trial beverage. S01 S02	Direct blood-pressure dose data are absent. The body-fat trial figures do not verify this dose.	Raw-material/extract quantity, beverage volume, frequency and consumption records for the direct trial	Verify trial-specific units and manufacturing yield, then distinguish nominal quantity from actual consumption.
6	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N06 · Evidence conditionAre exposure duration and assessment times in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?Required	Direct-trial duration is unverified in the claim conditions. The two current evidence records do not provide visits or exposure duration for a direct blood-pressure comparison. S01 S02	Actual duration and assessment times for a direct comparison cannot be established. No arbitrary minimum duration is imposed on every trial.	Exposure schedule, blood-pressure visits and observations after discontinuation for the direct trial	Compare visits with drinking records and separate effects during treatment from persistence after stopping.
7	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N07 · Evidence conditionCan actual hypertension participants’ selection and baseline status be verified?Required	The population boundary is adults with hypertension, but diagnosis and baseline status in an actually eligible trial are unverified. The Ye material analyzes body fat in overweight completers. S01 S02	The intended population is specified, but actual hypertension recruitment and baseline tables are not retained.	Diagnostic criteria, baseline characteristics, selection/exclusion table and group-specific blood pressure for the direct trial	Compare recruitment and baseline tables to distinguish the hypertension population in the question from other populations.
8	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N08 · Evidence conditionCan oral consumption and actual adherence in a direct trial be verified?Required	The original route is oral drinking. Actual consumption/adherence in a direct human blood-pressure trial are unverified; the manuscript excludes intravenous animal, cell and enzyme experiments. S01 S02	The intended route alone cannot verify actual trial exposure and adherence.	Route, consumption, returned-product, adherence and other lotus-product use records for the direct trial	Compare exposure records with result timing and separately retain gaps in adherence information.
9	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N09 · Evidence conditionIs the actual comparator in a direct blood-pressure comparison verified?Required	The original comparator is unverified because no eligible controlled trial was identified. Do not import a direct blood-pressure comparator from the body-fat trial or in vitro material. S01 S02	The contents, intake and treatment of an actual blood-pressure comparison group are not retained.	Control beverage, ingredients, intake schedule and common-treatment specifications for the direct trial	Separate actual differences in the comparison and examine what can be attributed to single lotus-leaf consumption.
10	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N10 · Evidence conditionAre the comparative design and allocation procedures of a direct blood-pressure trial verified?Required	The design and allocation procedures of a direct human blood-pressure trial are unverified in the retained material. The trial in the related evidence entry addresses a different body-fat endpoint. S01 S02	Direct comparative design is unverified; do not replace examination of crossover, clustering or allocation with Not applicable.	Original design, allocation, concealment and baseline-comparison material for the direct trial	Compare design/allocation information for each result and retain unverified designs as unverified.
11	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N11 · Evidence conditionCan antihypertensive treatment, lifestyle and rescue-treatment changes be separated from the drinking contribution?Required	Concomitant/rescue treatment and lifestyle data for a directly eligible trial are unverified. The original safety explanation retains gaps in checking interactions with antihypertensive and glucose-lowering medicines. S01 S02	There is no basis for verifying that other treatment was absent or the same between groups.	Group-specific concomitant medication, adjustments, lifestyle, rescue treatment, adherence and analytical handling	Compare concomitant treatment over time with the effect of interest to distinguish common management from drinking differences.
12	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N12 · Evidence conditionCan systolic-blood-pressure measurement conditions in a direct trial be verified?Required	The intended endpoint is office or 24-hour systolic blood pressure, but measurement in an eligible trial is unverified. Body-fat percentage and in vitro enzyme inhibition in the evidence records are different measurements. S01 S02	Direct blood-pressure devices, procedures, assessor blinding and measurement conditions by group cannot be verified.	Direct blood-pressure measurement manual, devices, visits, repetitions and blinding material	Compare measurement procedures with result tables and attribute office and 24-hour results separately.
13	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N13 · Evidence conditionAre blood-pressure units, final values or changes, and assessment visits verified?Required	The retained evidence entries record no blood-pressure efficacy result and no human blood-pressure result, respectively. Direct mmHg final values, changes and visits are unverified. S01 S02	No direct table establishes actual blood-pressure units, timing or change definitions. Do not extend this to nonreporting throughout an unread paper.	Direct blood-pressure result table, units, baseline/end values, visits and change definitions	Connect original-table result definitions with comparator and time; do not mix figures from other endpoints.
14	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N14 · Evidence conditionAre allocation, measurement and analysis denominators in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?Required	The direct blood-pressure denominator is unverified. Allocation of 95 participants and analysis of 60 overweight completers belong only to the Ye body-fat trial. S01 S02	The direct blood-pressure analysis denominator is absent. Do not reuse 95/60 or calculate new unique participant counts.	Group-specific flowchart and blood-pressure measurement/analysis denominators for the direct trial	Compare the flow from allocation to blood-pressure analysis and distinguish the role of each denominator.
15	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N15 · Evidence conditionCan missingness, withdrawals and their handling in a direct blood-pressure analysis be verified?Required	No direct blood-pressure follow-up or missingness material is retained. The related description of 60 body-fat completers informs that analysis, not blood-pressure missing-data handling. S01 S02	Missingness, loss to follow-up and handling by group in a direct trial cannot be verified. Do not calculate a new withdrawal rate from the difference between 95 and 60.	Direct blood-pressure trial flowchart, withdrawal reasons, missing-data handling and sensitivity analyses	Compare reasons for missing blood-pressure observations with analysis inclusion; do not estimate an unknown magnitude of bias.
16	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N16 · Evidence conditionIs the between-group effect estimated by a direct blood-pressure analysis verified?Required	The analysis population, model and between-group estimate for a direct blood-pressure comparison are not retained. Current material contains only the body-fat trial and in vitro results. S01 S02	An actual analysis corresponding to the blood-pressure effect of interest cannot be verified. Do not assign ITT or adjusted analysis arbitrarily.	Analysis population, model, effect of interest and between-group result table for the direct trial	Compare the analysis plan with original results to identify an estimator appropriate for the effect of interest.
17	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N17 · Evidence conditionCan a direct between-group blood-pressure estimate and uncertainty interval be verified?Required	Direct blood-pressure effect estimates, CI, SE and SD are unverified in the retained material. The original applicability-limit discussion explicitly states that unverified material does not prove an effect of 0. S01 S02	No original values establish between-group effect magnitude or interval. Do not create an interval from P values, mechanisms or related body-fat figures.	Direct between-group blood-pressure estimate, interval, variance definition, denominator and assessment time	Compare reported intervals and estimands with the original model; do not calculate absent values to fill gaps.
18	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N18 · Evidence conditionAre the evidence and criteria for judging the importance of a blood-pressure change verified?Required	A direct blood-pressure effect, interval and important-difference criterion for this question are not retained. The original ? and unrecorded values are retained. S01 S02	Importance cannot be judged without a direct estimate and criterion. Do not adopt arbitrary minimum n, duration or mmHg thresholds.	Direct blood-pressure effect/interval and a clearly sourced important difference or application criterion	Compare effect intervals with importance evidence without arbitrarily setting new thresholds or grades.
19	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N19 · Evidence conditionCan the prespecified plan and actual report of a direct blood-pressure trial be compared?Required	The current NCT04651023 is linked to the excluded Ye body-fat trial. Plans, reports and amendments for a direct blood-pressure trial are unverified. S01 S02	Material for comparing a direct prespecified plan is absent. Do not declare nonregistration, selective reporting or worldwide absence of registration.	Registration, protocol, analysis plan, complete results and amendment reasons for the direct blood-pressure trial	Compare planned and reported endpoints/times; preserve unfavorable and null results as well.
20	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N20 · Evidence conditionIs the same direct blood-pressure comparison verified in other independent study families?Required	The retained bibliography contains 2 reports in different contexts: a body-fat report and an in vitro report. Replication information for directly eligible blood-pressure families is unverified. S01 S02	No material establishes direct families or replication. Do not count the 2 reports as 2 blood-pressure trials or sum them into unique participant counts.	Direct blood-pressure trial family identities, registration, institutions, populations and result-link table	Compare eligibility by family; do not count reports/registration from the same trial more than once.
21	Met	Full text not readStored summary read	N21 · Evidence conditionWas the Ye body-fat report retained separately from direct blood-pressure efficacy?Required	The Ye report concerns body fat after a lotus-leaf hot-water-extract beverage. The original record contains no blood-pressure efficacy result; it retains the similar-formulation context and exclusion for population, effect and endpoint mismatch. S01	This item asks about retaining the related report’s role and exclusion reason. It does not assess verification of body-fat or direct blood-pressure effects.	Ye report title, population, body-fat endpoint, formulation, exclusion reason and original locations	When related reports are added, compare matching and mismatched aspects of the question separately.
22	Met	Full text not readStored summary read	N22 · Evidence conditionWere Ye’s 95 and 60 retained in their original denominator roles?Required	The original description is 95 allocated participants and 60 overweight completers analyzed. Both figures belong to the body-fat report and were not used as direct hypertension/systolic-blood-pressure denominators. S01	The original denominator roles are retained separately. This does not establish the validity of Ye’s whole analysis or verify direct blood-pressure n.	Ye’s original denominator description and population/endpoint locations	If further flowchart and analysis material is obtained, compare each denominator’s role without synthesizing a new withdrawal rate.
23	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N23 · Evidence conditionIs equivalence between the body-fat test beverage and hypertension-targeted lotus leaf tea verified?Required	The original key explanation specifies that a 400 mL test beverage with 1–2 g lotus-leaf hot-water extract is neither a hypertension blood-pressure trial nor the same formulation as ordinary tea. Equivalence data are unverified. S01	Original beverage figures alone cannot establish equivalence with ordinary tea or direct blood-pressure exposure.	Manufacture, composition, raw-material/extract quantity and intake for both formulations, plus direct blood-pressure population data	Compare formulation and exposure equivalence using material; retain unverified application to ordinary tea.
24	Met	Full text not readStored summary read	N24 · Evidence conditionWas in vitro ACE material retained separately from human blood-pressure results?Required	The second report is an in vitro ACE-inhibition experiment across plant parts, recorded as having no human participants, an in vitro enzyme-inhibition endpoint and no human blood-pressure result. Its exclusion as mechanistic/in vitro material is retained. S02	This item asks about distinguishing and retaining the study context. It does not verify in vitro precision or a human blood-pressure reduction.	In vitro design, participant description, enzyme endpoint and exclusion reason	Connect mechanistic and clinical material by result type; examine human effect direction and magnitude using separate direct material.
25	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N25 · Evidence conditionTo what extent are funding and author interests in the related reports verified?Supplementary; required for interpreting independence	The Ye record describes industry sponsorship and company-employee authors. The ACE record describes academic research, while its retained English field explicitly leaves the actual funding source unverified. Detailed disclosures/funding scope remain unverified. S01 S02	Some reported categories are available, but funding, product provision and complete disclosures remain unverified. Direct blood-pressure independence is also not established.	Study-funding, product-provision, employment, patent and conflict-of-interest sections for each report	Compare funding and interest sections report by report; examine direct blood-pressure trial independence separately.
26	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N26 · Evidence conditionCan harm collection, discontinuations and denominators for the same population and drink be verified?Supplementary; required for interpreting harms/safety	The original safety label is Caution. The retained record states that eligible trials were not available to establish hypertension-patient dose, long-term safety, special populations or concomitant interactions. Events, discontinuations, denominators and collection methods are unverified. S01 S02	Without harm-collection material for the same exposure/population, safety or incidence cannot be judged. Do not use counts in the two related reports as harm denominators.	AE definitions, collection, exposure/follow-up, denominators and discontinuation data for the same population/formulation	Examine efficacy and harm results separately; compare collection scope and missingness.
27	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N27 · Evidence conditionAre direct data available for vulnerable populations and concomitant-drug interactions?Supplementary; required for safety interpretation in the corresponding population/concomitant use	The original safety explanation specifies gaps for pregnancy, lactation, liver/kidney disease and antihypertensive or glucose-lowering drug interactions. Actual separate material is not retained. S01 S02	No material establishes safety in populations/interactions outside the selected blood-pressure question. Do not create personal dosing or medication-replacement instructions.	Population-specific exposure, baseline risk, concomitant medicines, interactions and follow-up material	Examine special populations and concomitant use with separate eligibility; do not extrapolate from general participants.
28	Not applicable	Full text not readStored summary read	N28 · Evidence conditionIs cardiovascular-event prevention assessed as a mandatory endpoint in this blood-pressure table?Supplementary; required for clinical-event extensions	The original claim here is reduced systolic blood pressure. Cardiovascular-event prevention, mortality and medication replacement are not added as endpoints of this table. S01 S02	No event-prevention claim was assigned, so this extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct blood-pressure missingness was not changed to Not applicable.	Direct event, comparator, follow-up and denominator data if an extension claim is made	If an event extension is requested, examine a separate independent boundary and required material.
29	Not applicable	Full text not readStored summary read	N29 · Evidence conditionDoes this table establish an optimal dose or persistence after discontinuation?Supplementary; required for dose/persistence extensions	This table concerns systolic-blood-pressure comparisons; it does not establish an optimal dose, post-discontinuation persistence or all subgroup effects. Actual direct dose and duration remain unverified in N05 and N06. S01 S02	Optimal dose and persistence are outside the original claim; only that extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct-trial dose/duration gaps remain.	Direct dose comparisons, post-discontinuation follow-up and prespecified subgroup material if an extension is claimed	Examine direct comparisons and follow-up within a new independent boundary for each extension question.
30	Met	Full text not readStored summary read	N30 · Evidence conditionWere retained summaries actually read distinguished from external-material reading status?Required	The retained review records reading the full current input and designated locations for this item. External PubMed, paper, PMC, trial-registration and new method full texts were not accessed, acquired or read. S01 S02	This narrow distinction matches the actions recorded in the retained review. It does not establish verification of external-material contents.	Actual reading scope, original locations, file fingerprints and reading history for each material	If access is actually performed, record a separate event, date and acquired scope, then update the badge.
31	Unverified	Full text not readStored summary read	N31 · Evidence conditionAre historical reading levels and actual access dates of original materials verified report by report?Required	The two citations have no individual access level or access date. The original review date is 2026-09-08 and the English correction date is 2026-09-14. Report-specific actual access dates and historical full-text access remain unrecorded. S01 S02	Actual report-specific access and dates cannot be verified because they are absent from the original material. Do not inherit global dates as individual reading dates.	Report-specific original-material access, acquisition, reading level, actual dates and material-type records	When original access history is added, compare the included document’s history separately from its underlying original materials.
32	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N32 · Evidence conditionTo what extent are the scope and currency of the retained search record verified?Required	The original research-review description records PubMed/ClinicalTrials.gov combinations of Nelumbo/lotus leaf/tea/infusion/hypertension/blood pressure, NCT04651023, and animal/in vitro exclusions. Exact searches, result lists and search dates are absent from the current input; no new search was conducted. S01 S02	Original databases, keywords and some exclusion context are verified, but reproducible complete searching, selection scope and currency are not.	Original search dates, strings, result lists, selection/exclusion records and registration-check scope	In subsequent updates, preserve search/selection histories separately and limit absence wording to checked scope and dates.
33	Met	Full text not readStored summary read	N33 · Evidence conditionWere the original ?, unrecorded values and human-study absence flag distinguished from related human material?Required	The original grade is ?, the score and evidence axes are unrecorded, and the human-study absence flag is true. These original values are retained. The related Ye human body-fat trial exists, while direct blood-pressure comparisons remain unverified within the retained scope. S01 S02	This item asks about retaining original values and interpretation boundaries; that record was completed. No clinical regrading of the flag or verification of 0 studies worldwide was performed.	Original grade, score, axes, related human evidence, direct boundary and locations of absence wording	If the manuscript is corrected, retain whole before/after versions and event reasons; distinguish verdict changes from changes in table attribution.
34	Met	Full text not readStored summary read	N34 · Evidence conditionWere the English correction event and unchanged original-verdict scope retained?Required	The original correction record states that on 2026-09-14,16 placeholder fields in the English evidence table were replaced with concrete English matching the retained Korean, without new research or regrading; ?, score, citations and verdict date were retained. S01 S02	The original correction event record and retained scope are preserved. Historical external full-text checking or new clinical certification is not reissued.	Before/after correction versions, change areas, event date and unchanged-grade record	For later corrections, retain the whole original and record wording, added evidence and verdict changes as separate events.
35	Partly verified	Full text not readStored summary read	N35 · Evidence conditionCan the related reports’ identifiers and study-family links actually be verified?Required	The retained bibliography identifies Ye 2022 with PMID 34852695, DOI 10.1080/14786419.2021.2010196 and NCT04651023. The other mechanistic report has PMID 37050065 and PMCID PMC10097295. These are retained local links; external identity and registration contents were not compared. S01 S02	Local identifiers and related contexts exist, but external identity and family comparison against original papers/registration remain unverified. Directly eligible blood-pressure family and unique participant counts are unrecorded.	Original-paper/registration identity comparisons and actual study-family/result links for each report	Compare identifiers and originals; update same/different/unknown relationships only to the established level.

No items match your search or filter.

35 itemsWhat the statuses mean

Assessment scope

Stored-material review date: 2026-10-05
Original evidence review date: 2026-09-08
Scope actually checked: Retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records. Full papers, supplements, registrations, plans and original data were not read.
What the dates mean: The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.
Population: Adults with hypertension
Ingredient, formulation and route: Oral consumption of single Nelumbo nucifera lotus leaf tea or a defined lotus leaf hot-water infusion; an actually eligible trial formulation is unverified
Dose: Actual dose in a directly eligible blood-pressure trial is unverified
Comparator: Actual concurrent comparator in a directly eligible blood-pressure trial is unverified
Measured outcome: The intended endpoint is office or 24-hour systolic blood pressure; measurement and results in an actual direct trial are unverified
Duration: Actual exposure duration and assessment times in a directly eligible blood-pressure trial are unverified
Questions outside this scope: The human body-fat trial and in vitro ACE material are retained as related context; they do not replace a direct blood-pressure comparison. Directly eligible unique study/participant counts are unrecorded; this does not mean 0 studies or an effect of 0.; Allocation of 95 and analysis of 60 overweight completers, and the 1–2 g extract/400 mL beverage, belong to the body-fat report. Do not transfer them as hypertension blood-pressure trial counts/dose or equivalence with ordinary tea.; Do not extend to other plant parts, alkaloids, capsules, combination products, intravenous animal results, cardiovascular-event prevention, medication replacement, optimal dose or persistence after discontinuation.; Retain the original Caution label. Unverified pregnancy, lactation, liver/kidney disease, concomitant medicines, long-term or rare harms do not establish safety or personal dosing instructions.

Evidence and sources

The links below lead to the sources. A link alone does not mean the original source was read or its latest publication status verified.

S01 · Ye 2022 lotus-leaf hot-water-extract beverage/body-fat report

PubMed

Material type: Retained bibliography/evidence summary of a related human body-fat trial
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Findings recorded in the stored summary: Retained report record: Ye 2022 concerns body fat after a lotus-leaf hot-water-extract beverage, with 95 allocated participants and 60 overweight completers analyzed, industry sponsorship and company-employee authors. The endpoint is body-fat percentage; no blood-pressure efficacy result is present in the retained record. The 1–2 g extract/400 mL test beverage is not used as a hypertension dose for ordinary tea. NCT04651023 is the retained identifier of this related trial; its registration original was not read in this work.
Record level: A retained body-fat trial summary. Despite a similar formulation, population, effect and endpoint mismatch exclude it as direct blood-pressure evidence. Blood-pressure effects, denominators, dose and intervals were neither verified nor newly calculated.
Study overlap and independent replication: These are local context links for S01, a body-fat report, and S02, an in vitro report. Do not count the 2 reports as 2 direct blood-pressure trials. Original-paper/registration family relationships and directly eligible unique study/participant counts remain unverified.

Public availability, access and reading status by material
Material	Public availability	Access status	Actually read	Notes
Retained bilingual research/bibliographic summaries and historical review record	Retained copy acquired; summary read	Retained copy acquired; summary read	Stored existing review summary read	Actual values and locations in the retained summary were read. Distinguish this from external clinical full-text bytes. Past manuscript descriptions of external cross-checking are historical records. They do not establish current actual reading of external bibliography, abstracts, full text or registration. The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.
PubMed bibliography/abstract entry point; actual public availability unverified	Material type recorded; current public availability unverified	External access not attempted; not acquired	Not read	An entry-point link from the retained bibliography. Current URL response and bibliographic/abstract contents were not checked; access, acquisition and reading were not attempted. Past manuscript descriptions of external cross-checking are historical records. They do not establish current actual reading of external bibliography, abstracts, full text or registration. The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.
Full paper: direct URL and current access scope unverified	Material type recorded; current public availability unverified	External access not attempted; not acquired	Not read	Direct full-text URL and current availability scope remain unverified. Distinguish the bibliographic entry point from full text; external access, acquisition and reading were not attempted. Past manuscript descriptions of external cross-checking are historical records. They do not establish current actual reading of external bibliography, abstracts, full text or registration. The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.
Original trial-registration material NCT04651023; direct URL unverified	Material type recorded; current public availability unverified	External access not attempted; not acquired	Not read	The registration identifier is present only in the retained bibliography. A direct registration URL is unrecorded; actual page existence, content, access, acquisition and reading were not established in this work. Past manuscript descriptions of external cross-checking are historical records. They do not establish current actual reading of external bibliography, abstracts, full text or registration. The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.

S02 · Seasonal/plant-part lotus in vitro ACE report

PubMed

Material type: Retained bibliography/evidence summary of a plant-part in vitro mechanistic study
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Findings recorded in the stored summary: Retained report record: Seasonal Effects on Phenolic Contents and In Vitro Health-Promoting Bioactivities of Sacred Lotus is a plant-part in vitro ACE-inhibition study. It records no human participants, an in vitro enzyme-inhibition endpoint and no human blood-pressure result; it was excluded as mechanistic material. Although described as academic research, the retained English record explicitly leaves actual funding unverified. PMID 37050065 and PMCID PMC10097295 are local bibliographic identifiers; actual full-paper comparison was not performed in this work.
Record level: In vitro mechanistic material, not a human blood-pressure effect. Distinguish no human participants in this experiment from worldwide absence of human studies; academic research does not prove independent funding.
Study overlap and independent replication: These are local context links for S01, a body-fat report, and S02, an in vitro report. Do not count the 2 reports as 2 direct blood-pressure trials. Original-paper/registration family relationships and directly eligible unique study/participant counts remain unverified.

Public availability, access and reading status by material
Material	Public availability	Access status	Actually read	Notes
Retained bilingual research/bibliographic summaries and historical review record	Retained copy acquired; summary read	Retained copy acquired; summary read	Stored existing review summary read	Actual values and locations in the retained summary were read. Distinguish this from external clinical full-text bytes. Past manuscript descriptions of external cross-checking are historical records. They do not establish current actual reading of external bibliography, abstracts, full text or registration. The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.
PubMed bibliography/abstract entry point; actual public availability unverified	Material type recorded; current public availability unverified	External access not attempted; not acquired	Not read	An entry-point link from the retained bibliography. Current URL response and bibliographic/abstract contents were not checked; access, acquisition and reading were not attempted. Past manuscript descriptions of external cross-checking are historical records. They do not establish current actual reading of external bibliography, abstracts, full text or registration. The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.
Full paper: direct URL and current access scope unverified	Material type recorded; current public availability unverified	External access not attempted; not acquired	Not read	Direct full-text URL and current availability scope remain unverified. Distinguish the bibliographic entry point from full text; external access, acquisition and reading were not attempted. Past manuscript descriptions of external cross-checking are historical records. They do not establish current actual reading of external bibliography, abstracts, full text or registration. The original review date is 2026-09-08, the historical correction date is 2026-09-14 and the case-record review date is 2026-10-05. Historical access level and access date for individual external materials are not recorded; current access was not attempted.

Report counts versus independent study counts

These are local context links for S01, a body-fat report, and S02, an in vitro report. Do not count the 2 reports as 2 direct blood-pressure trials. Original-paper/registration family relationships and directly eligible unique study/participant counts remain unverified.

Review criteria

Version 1.0 · Criteria record date 2026-10-05. These are Chamgap's own application conditions, informed by the referenced methods. They do not constitute official assessment-tool certification or a new efficacy score.

N01 · Which original claim and boundaries does this table convert?

Required materials and conditions: Canonical claim, plant part, route, population, endpoint, exclusions and original record locations
Conditions for verification: Connect the systolic-blood-pressure claim to a comparative question about single lotus leaf tea or a defined hot-water infusion in adults with hypertension; exclude other endpoints and plant parts.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Korean and English describe the same claim. The original subclaim list is empty; do not create absent subclaims.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid combining body-fat, mechanistic or other plant-part effects solely because the plant name is the same.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N02 · Can an actual controlled human blood-pressure trial matching this boundary be identified?

Required materials and conditions: Trial report and identity matching the exact plant part, formulation, population, blood-pressure endpoint and comparator
Conditions for verification: Verify the identity and design of a report in which adults with hypertension actually drank single lotus leaf tea or infusion and systolic blood pressure was compared with a concurrent control.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating the existence of a related human body-fat trial as the existence of a direct blood-pressure comparison.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N03 · Can the botanical identity and leaf history of the actual blood-pressure trial product be verified?

Required materials and conditions: Botanical identification, plant part, batch, cultivar, origin and harvest records for the direct-trial product
Conditions for verification: Verify Nelumbo nucifera leaf identification, cultivar, origin and harvest timing, or equivalent product traceability, for the actual trial.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid exchanging lotus plumules, seeds, roots or different leaf conditions for the same exposure.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N04 · What formulation and manufacturing conditions were actually consumed in the blood-pressure trial?

Required materials and conditions: Manufacturing specifications, infusion conditions, batch testing and full ingredient list for the direct blood-pressure trial
Conditions for verification: Verify raw-material quantity, extraction/infusion procedure, composition or batch standardization, and mixed ingredients for the actual single tea or hot-water infusion.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating similarly named teas, capsules and extract test beverages as the same exposure.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N05 · Are dose and drinking schedule in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Required materials and conditions: Raw-material/extract quantity, beverage volume, frequency and consumption records for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Connect raw-material/extract mass, beverage volume/frequency and actual daily amount to the blood-pressure trial; distinguish amounts provided from amounts consumed.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid inheriting the body-fat trial’s 1–2 g and 400 mL as a hypertension treatment dose.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N06 · Are exposure duration and assessment times in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Required materials and conditions: Exposure schedule, blood-pressure visits and observations after discontinuation for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Connect start/end dates, blood-pressure assessment visits and actual exposure duration to the comparison.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid filling blood-pressure observation duration with another endpoint’s trial duration or traditional-use duration.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N07 · Can actual hypertension participants’ selection and baseline status be verified?

Required materials and conditions: Diagnostic criteria, baseline characteristics, selection/exclusion table and group-specific blood pressure for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Connect diagnostic criteria, baseline blood pressure, age, severity, inclusion/exclusion, baseline treatment and distributions by group to the direct trial.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid relabeling overweight completers as hypertension patients or extending results unchanged to general adults.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N08 · Can oral consumption and actual adherence in a direct trial be verified?

Required materials and conditions: Route, consumption, returned-product, adherence and other lotus-product use records for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Verify actual route, frequency, adherence, contamination or crossover consumption of the trial product.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to distinguish in vitro or intravenous animal results from oral drinking and avoid automatically equating supplied beverage with actual intake.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N09 · Is the actual comparator in a direct blood-pressure comparison verified?

Required materials and conditions: Control beverage, ingredients, intake schedule and common-treatment specifications for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Verify the actual control beverage, placebo or usual-care group’s ingredients, intake, common management and differences between groups.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting uncontrolled or mechanistic material into a between-group comparison or recording an intended placebo as an actual placebo.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N10 · Are the comparative design and allocation procedures of a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Required materials and conditions: Original design, allocation, concealment and baseline-comparison material for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Verify parallel/crossover design, randomized/nonrandomized allocation, concealment and baseline comparison for the actual result.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: A related report’s use of the word trial does not establish the design for the direct question.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N11 · Can antihypertensive treatment, lifestyle and rescue-treatment changes be separated from the drinking contribution?

Required materials and conditions: Group-specific concomitant medication, adjustments, lifestyle, rescue treatment, adherence and analytical handling
Conditions for verification: Verify baseline antihypertensives, medication adjustments, rescue treatment, diet/exercise changes and actual analytical handling by group.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not require every change to be identical between groups. Match the actual effect of interest and analysis; distinguish interaction-data gaps from absent efficacy.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid attributing differences in concurrent management affecting blood pressure to lotus leaf tea.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N12 · Can systolic-blood-pressure measurement conditions in a direct trial be verified?

Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure measurement manual, devices, visits, repetitions and blinding material
Conditions for verification: Verify office or 24-hour measurement, device, posture, repetitions/averaging, time of day, assessor and the same procedure between groups.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting body-fat percentage or enzyme inhibition into blood-pressure values and to distinguish measurement differences from actual change.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N13 · Are blood-pressure units, final values or changes, and assessment visits verified?

Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure result table, units, baseline/end values, visits and change definitions
Conditions for verification: Connect systolic-blood-pressure units, final value/change, visit and analytical direction for direct results to the original table.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning the presence of an endpoint name into reported actual blood-pressure figures.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N14 · Are allocation, measurement and analysis denominators in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Required materials and conditions: Group-specific flowchart and blood-pressure measurement/analysis denominators for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Distinguish allocation, exposure, blood-pressure measurement and analysis counts by group; connect each denominator with its actual result.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid inheriting 95 and 60 from another endpoint as direct blood-pressure analysis counts.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N15 · Can missingness, withdrawals and their handling in a direct blood-pressure analysis be verified?

Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure trial flowchart, withdrawal reasons, missing-data handling and sensitivity analyses
Conditions for verification: Verify missing blood-pressure observations, discontinuation/withdrawal reasons, group differences and analysis inclusion, imputation and sensitivity handling.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid judging follow-up completeness or missing-data bias in a direct trial solely from the word completers.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N16 · Is the between-group effect estimated by a direct blood-pressure analysis verified?

Required materials and conditions: Analysis population, model, effect of interest and between-group result table for the direct trial
Conditions for verification: Verify assignment/adherence effects, ITT/PP or other analysis populations, between-/within-group distinctions and a valid analytical model.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: A valid unadjusted between-group analysis may suit the design and effect of interest. Verifying a formal effect does not always require covariate adjustment.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid importing uncontrolled changes or another endpoint’s analysis as a between-group blood-pressure effect of lotus leaf tea.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N17 · Can a direct between-group blood-pressure estimate and uncertainty interval be verified?

Required materials and conditions: Direct between-group blood-pressure estimate, interval, variance definition, denominator and assessment time
Conditions for verification: Connect a reported between-group blood-pressure estimate, CI/SE/SD type, result denominator and assessment time to the original table.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning a failure to identify evidence into an effect of 0 or a sufficiently precise null difference.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N18 · Are the evidence and criteria for judging the importance of a blood-pressure change verified?

Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure effect/interval and a clearly sourced important difference or application criterion
Conditions for verification: Verify material allowing the actually reported interval to be compared with a justified important difference and application context for the question.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid declaring clinical sufficiency solely from significance or trial counts.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N19 · Can the prespecified plan and actual report of a direct blood-pressure trial be compared?

Required materials and conditions: Registration, protocol, analysis plan, complete results and amendment reasons for the direct blood-pressure trial
Conditions for verification: Compare registration/protocol, analysis plan and reports for direct blood-pressure endpoints, times and analyses; verify reasons for changes.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid inheriting a related body-fat registration as a direct blood-pressure plan or declaring selective reporting without evidence.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N20 · Is the same direct blood-pressure comparison verified in other independent study families?

Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure trial family identities, registration, institutions, populations and result-link table
Conditions for verification: Verify eligible-family populations, drinking exposures, blood-pressure outcomes, comparators, times and report links to distinguish replication from recitation.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning report counts or mechanistic studies into independent replications of direct efficacy.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N21 · Was the Ye body-fat report retained separately from direct blood-pressure efficacy?

Required materials and conditions: Ye report title, population, body-fat endpoint, formulation, exclusion reason and original locations
Conditions for verification: Preserve both the related formulation and the exclusion reason based on mismatched population, effect and endpoint.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Successful record separation does not satisfy the direct-comparison requirement. Direct blood-pressure material remains unverified in N02 and the other actual-data questions.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to retain related human material without upgrading effects outside the question into direct evidence.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N22 · Were Ye’s 95 and 60 retained in their original denominator roles?

Required materials and conditions: Ye’s original denominator description and population/endpoint locations
Conditions for verification: Retain allocation of 95 and analysis of 60 overweight completers as distinct body-fat report denominators; do not use them as direct blood-pressure analysis n.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not newly calculate withdrawal counts, rates or causes from the difference between 95 and 60. Do not infer absent flowcharts or hypertension subgroups.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting allocation counts into analysis counts or denominators for other results.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N23 · Is equivalence between the body-fat test beverage and hypertension-targeted lotus leaf tea verified?

Required materials and conditions: Manufacture, composition, raw-material/extract quantity and intake for both formulations, plus direct blood-pressure population data
Conditions for verification: Verify manufacture, composition, exposure and application to a direct population for the 1–2 g hot-water extract/400 mL test beverage and the selected tea/infusion.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: A similar-formulation description does not prove the same product or exposure.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N24 · Was in vitro ACE material retained separately from human blood-pressure results?

Required materials and conditions: In vitro design, participant description, enzyme endpoint and exclusion reason
Conditions for verification: Retain the actual context of plant-part in vitro enzyme inhibition with no human participants; do not convert it into clinical blood-pressure figures.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: No human participants is a design fact about this in vitro study. It does not mean 0 human lotus-related studies worldwide.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid mixing the existence of a mechanism with a human treatment effect.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N25 · To what extent are funding and author interests in the related reports verified?

Required materials and conditions: Study-funding, product-provision, employment, patent and conflict-of-interest sections for each report
Conditions for verification: Verify actual study funding, product provision, employment, patents and interest disclosures in each report’s original material. Specify the funding/independence scope; category descriptions alone remain partial information.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for interpreting independence
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating academic classification as proof of independent funding or industry support as automatic invalidation.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N26 · Can harm collection, discontinuations and denominators for the same population and drink be verified?

Required materials and conditions: AE definitions, collection, exposure/follow-up, denominators and discontinuation data for the same population/formulation
Conditions for verification: Verify actual exposure, follow-up, event definitions, collection, discontinuations, denominators by group and harm records in adults with hypertension.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for interpreting harms/safety
Application exceptions: This table asks about blood-pressure comparisons. Harm material is not always mandatory for efficacy, but the gap must remain when making safety claims.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning unverified direct efficacy or absent harm figures into safety or 0 events.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N27 · Are direct data available for vulnerable populations and concomitant-drug interactions?

Required materials and conditions: Population-specific exposure, baseline risk, concomitant medicines, interactions and follow-up material
Conditions for verification: Verify actual populations, exposures and outcomes for pregnancy, lactation, liver/kidney disease and concomitant antihypertensive/glucose-lowering medicines.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for safety interpretation in the corresponding population/concomitant use
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating single oral tea as proof of safety across all populations and drug combinations.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N28 · Is cardiovascular-event prevention assessed as a mandatory endpoint in this blood-pressure table?

Required materials and conditions: Direct event, comparator, follow-up and denominator data if an extension claim is made
Conditions for verification: When the selected claim is limited to systolic-blood-pressure comparison, treat event prevention as a separate direct claim rather than an always-mandatory blood-pressure endpoint.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for clinical-event extensions
Application exceptions: Do not always require event material. Not applicable is limited to the current extension scope; it does not establish absent event effects or safety.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to distinguish a numerical-change question from event-prevention or medication-replacement questions.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N29 · Does this table establish an optimal dose or persistence after discontinuation?

Required materials and conditions: Direct dose comparisons, post-discontinuation follow-up and prespecified subgroup material if an extension is claimed
Conditions for verification: If the original claim does not include dose optimization or post-discontinuation comparisons, do not add those judgments. Actual main-trial dose and duration remain separately required.
Requirement and applicability: Supplementary; required for dose/persistence extensions
Application exceptions: Do not remove the need for actual main-trial dose/duration. Do not create arbitrary minimum-dose, duration or subgroup obligations.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid confusing unverified main-trial dose with unrequested optimal-dose/persistence claims.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N30 · Were retained summaries actually read distinguished from external-material reading status?

Required materials and conditions: Actual reading scope, original locations, file fingerprints and reading history for each material
Conditions for verification: Separate actual reading of the retained summary from unattempted/unread external bibliography, abstracts, full papers and registration for each material.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: External access not attempted does not mean inaccessible. Summary-read badges refer only to exact retained locations and file fingerprints.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating the presence of a URL, PMID, PMCID or NCT as successful reading of external full text.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N31 · Are historical reading levels and actual access dates of original materials verified report by report?

Required materials and conditions: Report-specific original-material access, acquisition, reading level, actual dates and material-type records
Conditions for verification: Verify each original material’s access level/date or actual access log; distinguish them from global review and correction dates.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid issuing current or historical full-text reading status solely from dates or bibliography links.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N32 · To what extent are the scope and currency of the retained search record verified?

Required materials and conditions: Original search dates, strings, result lists, selection/exclusion records and registration-check scope
Conditions for verification: Verify original search dates, complete search strings, result lists and selection/exclusion procedures to reproduce the search for directly eligible comparisons. Databases and partial keywords alone require distinguishing verified parts from gaps.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid expanding one search-record sentence into a complete current literature review or proof of worldwide research absence.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N33 · Were the original ?, unrecorded values and human-study absence flag distinguished from related human material?

Required materials and conditions: Original grade, score, axes, related human evidence, direct boundary and locations of absence wording
Conditions for verification: Retain the original grade ?, unrecorded score/axes and true human-study absence flag; separately explain the related human body-fat trial and unverified direct blood-pressure material.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: Do not import absent evidence-status, editorial-review, material-list, study-family or evidence-cutoff fields from adjacent cases. Retain absent, unrecorded, false and empty-list states separately.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to retain the original status without interpreting an absence flag as worldwide human-evidence absence or an effect of 0.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N34 · Were the English correction event and unchanged original-verdict scope retained?

Required materials and conditions: Before/after correction versions, change areas, event date and unchanged-grade record
Conditions for verification: Connect the original record of the 2026-09-14 correction of 16 English evidence-table fields with retention of grade, score, citations and verdict date without new research or regrading.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: If the whole historical pre-correction manuscript is absent from this input, do not claim new access/comparison. This concerns retention of the original correction record.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting a translation/wording correction into new clinical evidence or verdict validation.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

N35 · Can the related reports’ identifiers and study-family links actually be verified?

Required materials and conditions: Original-paper/registration identity comparisons and actual study-family/result links for each report
Conditions for verification: Compare actual report title, PMID, DOI, PMCID and NCT identities and study/endpoint links against original papers/registration. Local identifiers alone remain partial information with the uncompared scope explicit.
Requirement and applicability: Required
Application exceptions: S01/S02 are local bibliography-array tracking IDs, not original material-ID keys. Do not create new original-material collections from absent native material/study-family lists.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid counting related reports, registration and bibliography entries as independent blood-pressure trials or new participant families.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Referenced methods and the sections actually reviewed

M03 · Cochrane Handbook 6.5 (2024), chapter updated 2023-08

Official methodology · §3.1, §3.2.1–3.2.3, MECIR C5/C7/C13

Referenced principle: Clearly record the question, eligibility conditions and reasons for changes; distinguish intervention variants.
Extent of review: 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

Official methodology · §4.5, §4.6.1–4.6.3, MECIR C42

Referenced principle: Link studies and reports separately; do not omit studies solely because results are unreported.
Extent of review: 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

Official methodology · §8.1–8.2.3, Table 8.2.a

Referenced principle: Fix the result and effect of interest when examining randomization, deviations, missingness, measurement and selective reporting.
Extent of review: 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

Official methodology · §15.2.4, §15.3.1–15.3.3

Referenced principle: Distinguish effect estimates, intervals, importance and applicability. Sample size alone does not determine precision.
Extent of review: 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

Official methodology · §19.1.2, §19.2.1–19.2.4

Referenced principle: Harm questions may require different designs, populations and follow-up from efficacy questions. Case reports do not establish incidence.
Extent of review: Retained method-application records were reused. External originals were not reread and method content was not reassessed.

What the statuses mean

Met: The narrow record, identity attribution or action specified by the question is verified. Do not automatically extend this to direct efficacy, precision or safety certification.
Partly verified: Some actual information required by the question is verified, but funding, identity, search scope or other verification remains incomplete.
Unverified: The actual facts/material required by the question cannot be established from retained material. This does not mean an effect of 0, worldwide research absence or failed access.
Not reported: Limited to the explicit material/section actually read. Do not newly assign this status to an entire unread paper.
Conflicting data: Used when reports of the same actual fact disagree. Different endpoints or interpretation of an original absence flag are not automatically regraded as conflicting data.
Not applicable: Used only with a specific reason for an extension obligation outside the actual scope of the current independent question. It does not replace unverified direct material or unread external material.
Inaccessible: Used only for an actual failed-access event. Do not assign it to external access not attempted in this work.
Review incomplete: Limited to the scope of external original-material comparisons not yet performed. Do not retrospectively mark completed local-summary content reading as incomplete.

Change history

2026-10-28 · Public page/material version 1.0

The public view and materials were prepared from the existing 35 items. No new clinical search, verification-state change or scoring was performed.

The stored-material review date (2026-10-05) and original evidence review date (2026-09-08) were retained unchanged.

Researcher downloads

These materials provide the same evidence, scope and verification status as this page.

View all item details

N01 · Which original claim and boundaries does this table convert?

Current findings: The original claim is reduced systolic blood pressure in adults with hypertension. It is limited to oral consumption of a single lotus leaf tea or defined hot-water infusion; body-fat, in vitro ACE, seed, alkaloid and intravenous animal results are excluded.
Verification status: Met
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The original claim and table inclusion/exclusion boundaries are connected to the retained manuscript. This does not mean a direct blood-pressure effect was verified.
Reason for missing information: None within this narrow record scope.
Required materials and conditions: Canonical claim, plant part, route, population, endpoint, exclusions and original record locations
Materials to obtain first: Canonical claim, plant part, route, population, endpoint, exclusions and original record locations
Further research: If the manuscript boundary changes, preserve the whole previous manuscript and compare the independent question again.
Remaining uncertainty: None within this narrow record scope. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Connect the systolic-blood-pressure claim to a comparative question about single lotus leaf tea or a defined hot-water infusion in adults with hypertension; exclude other endpoints and plant parts.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid combining body-fat, mechanistic or other plant-part effects solely because the plant name is the same.
Application exceptions: Korean and English describe the same claim. The original subclaim list is empty; do not create absent subclaims.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N02 · Can an actual controlled human blood-pressure trial matching this boundary be identified?

Current findings: The retained reader answer and evidence table record that no directly eligible controlled human blood-pressure trial was identified. The Ye body-fat trial and in vitro ACE material are excluded for different reasons.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: A directly eligible comparison is unverified in this retained input. No new search was conducted; this does not establish the absence of all human studies.
Reason for missing information: A directly eligible comparison is unverified in this retained input. No new search was conducted; this does not establish the absence of all human studies.
Required materials and conditions: Trial report and identity matching the exact plant part, formulation, population, blood-pressure endpoint and comparator
Materials to obtain first: Trial report and identity matching the exact plant part, formulation, population, blood-pressure endpoint and comparator
Further research: In subsequent material selection, compare each report with this eligibility boundary and retain exclusion reasons.
Remaining uncertainty: A directly eligible comparison is unverified in this retained input. No new search was conducted; this does not establish the absence of all human studies. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify the identity and design of a report in which adults with hypertension actually drank single lotus leaf tea or infusion and systolic blood pressure was compared with a concurrent control.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating the existence of a related human body-fat trial as the existence of a direct blood-pressure comparison.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N03 · Can the botanical identity and leaf history of the actual blood-pressure trial product be verified?

Current findings: The original claim conditions specify Nelumbo nucifera leaves, but exact cultivar, origin and harvest timing are unverified. Product identification material for a direct blood-pressure trial is also not retained.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The question concerns the actual direct-trial product. Naming the intended leaf does not establish its history.
Reason for missing information: The question concerns the actual direct-trial product. Naming the intended leaf does not establish its history.
Required materials and conditions: Botanical identification, plant part, batch, cultivar, origin and harvest records for the direct-trial product
Materials to obtain first: Botanical identification, plant part, batch, cultivar, origin and harvest records for the direct-trial product
Further research: Compare product specifications with the trial report and distinguish leaf identity from unverified history.
Remaining uncertainty: The question concerns the actual direct-trial product. Naming the intended leaf does not establish its history. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify Nelumbo nucifera leaf identification, cultivar, origin and harvest timing, or equivalent product traceability, for the actual trial.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid exchanging lotus plumules, seeds, roots or different leaf conditions for the same exposure.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N04 · What formulation and manufacturing conditions were actually consumed in the blood-pressure trial?

Current findings: The original formulation is tea or a defined hot-water infusion; the eligible trial formulation is unverified. The manuscript excludes importing hot-water-extract capsules, body-fat beverages or mixed teas.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: No material verifies actual manufacture, batch or mixed ingredients in a direct blood-pressure trial.
Reason for missing information: No material verifies actual manufacture, batch or mixed ingredients in a direct blood-pressure trial.
Required materials and conditions: Manufacturing specifications, infusion conditions, batch testing and full ingredient list for the direct blood-pressure trial
Materials to obtain first: Manufacturing specifications, infusion conditions, batch testing and full ingredient list for the direct blood-pressure trial
Further research: Compare the trial formulation with the drinking boundary and record differences from ordinary tea, capsules and combination products.
Remaining uncertainty: No material verifies actual manufacture, batch or mixed ingredients in a direct blood-pressure trial. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify raw-material quantity, extraction/infusion procedure, composition or batch standardization, and mixed ingredients for the actual single tea or hot-water infusion.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating similarly named teas, capsules and extract test beverages as the same exposure.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N05 · Are dose and drinking schedule in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Current findings: The dose in a directly eligible controlled trial is unverified. The 1–2 g lotus-leaf hot-water extract and 400 mL in the original key explanation describe only the body-fat trial beverage.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Direct blood-pressure dose data are absent. The body-fat trial figures do not verify this dose.
Reason for missing information: Direct blood-pressure dose data are absent. The body-fat trial figures do not verify this dose.
Required materials and conditions: Raw-material/extract quantity, beverage volume, frequency and consumption records for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Raw-material/extract quantity, beverage volume, frequency and consumption records for the direct trial
Further research: Verify trial-specific units and manufacturing yield, then distinguish nominal quantity from actual consumption.
Remaining uncertainty: Direct blood-pressure dose data are absent. The body-fat trial figures do not verify this dose. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Connect raw-material/extract mass, beverage volume/frequency and actual daily amount to the blood-pressure trial; distinguish amounts provided from amounts consumed.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid inheriting the body-fat trial’s 1–2 g and 400 mL as a hypertension treatment dose.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N06 · Are exposure duration and assessment times in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Current findings: Direct-trial duration is unverified in the claim conditions. The two current evidence records do not provide visits or exposure duration for a direct blood-pressure comparison.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Actual duration and assessment times for a direct comparison cannot be established. No arbitrary minimum duration is imposed on every trial.
Reason for missing information: Actual duration and assessment times for a direct comparison cannot be established. No arbitrary minimum duration is imposed on every trial.
Required materials and conditions: Exposure schedule, blood-pressure visits and observations after discontinuation for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Exposure schedule, blood-pressure visits and observations after discontinuation for the direct trial
Further research: Compare visits with drinking records and separate effects during treatment from persistence after stopping.
Remaining uncertainty: Actual duration and assessment times for a direct comparison cannot be established. No arbitrary minimum duration is imposed on every trial. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Connect start/end dates, blood-pressure assessment visits and actual exposure duration to the comparison.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid filling blood-pressure observation duration with another endpoint’s trial duration or traditional-use duration.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N07 · Can actual hypertension participants’ selection and baseline status be verified?

Current findings: The population boundary is adults with hypertension, but diagnosis and baseline status in an actually eligible trial are unverified. The Ye material analyzes body fat in overweight completers.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The intended population is specified, but actual hypertension recruitment and baseline tables are not retained.
Reason for missing information: The intended population is specified, but actual hypertension recruitment and baseline tables are not retained.
Required materials and conditions: Diagnostic criteria, baseline characteristics, selection/exclusion table and group-specific blood pressure for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Diagnostic criteria, baseline characteristics, selection/exclusion table and group-specific blood pressure for the direct trial
Further research: Compare recruitment and baseline tables to distinguish the hypertension population in the question from other populations.
Remaining uncertainty: The intended population is specified, but actual hypertension recruitment and baseline tables are not retained. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Connect diagnostic criteria, baseline blood pressure, age, severity, inclusion/exclusion, baseline treatment and distributions by group to the direct trial.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid relabeling overweight completers as hypertension patients or extending results unchanged to general adults.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N08 · Can oral consumption and actual adherence in a direct trial be verified?

Current findings: The original route is oral drinking. Actual consumption/adherence in a direct human blood-pressure trial are unverified; the manuscript excludes intravenous animal, cell and enzyme experiments.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The intended route alone cannot verify actual trial exposure and adherence.
Reason for missing information: The intended route alone cannot verify actual trial exposure and adherence.
Required materials and conditions: Route, consumption, returned-product, adherence and other lotus-product use records for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Route, consumption, returned-product, adherence and other lotus-product use records for the direct trial
Further research: Compare exposure records with result timing and separately retain gaps in adherence information.
Remaining uncertainty: The intended route alone cannot verify actual trial exposure and adherence. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify actual route, frequency, adherence, contamination or crossover consumption of the trial product.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to distinguish in vitro or intravenous animal results from oral drinking and avoid automatically equating supplied beverage with actual intake.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N09 · Is the actual comparator in a direct blood-pressure comparison verified?

Current findings: The original comparator is unverified because no eligible controlled trial was identified. Do not import a direct blood-pressure comparator from the body-fat trial or in vitro material.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The contents, intake and treatment of an actual blood-pressure comparison group are not retained.
Reason for missing information: The contents, intake and treatment of an actual blood-pressure comparison group are not retained.
Required materials and conditions: Control beverage, ingredients, intake schedule and common-treatment specifications for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Control beverage, ingredients, intake schedule and common-treatment specifications for the direct trial
Further research: Separate actual differences in the comparison and examine what can be attributed to single lotus-leaf consumption.
Remaining uncertainty: The contents, intake and treatment of an actual blood-pressure comparison group are not retained. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify the actual control beverage, placebo or usual-care group’s ingredients, intake, common management and differences between groups.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting uncontrolled or mechanistic material into a between-group comparison or recording an intended placebo as an actual placebo.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N10 · Are the comparative design and allocation procedures of a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Current findings: The design and allocation procedures of a direct human blood-pressure trial are unverified in the retained material. The trial in the related evidence entry addresses a different body-fat endpoint.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Direct comparative design is unverified; do not replace examination of crossover, clustering or allocation with Not applicable.
Reason for missing information: Direct comparative design is unverified; do not replace examination of crossover, clustering or allocation with Not applicable.
Required materials and conditions: Original design, allocation, concealment and baseline-comparison material for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Original design, allocation, concealment and baseline-comparison material for the direct trial
Further research: Compare design/allocation information for each result and retain unverified designs as unverified.
Remaining uncertainty: Direct comparative design is unverified; do not replace examination of crossover, clustering or allocation with Not applicable. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify parallel/crossover design, randomized/nonrandomized allocation, concealment and baseline comparison for the actual result.
Why this condition is needed: A related report’s use of the word trial does not establish the design for the direct question.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N11 · Can antihypertensive treatment, lifestyle and rescue-treatment changes be separated from the drinking contribution?

Current findings: Concomitant/rescue treatment and lifestyle data for a directly eligible trial are unverified. The original safety explanation retains gaps in checking interactions with antihypertensive and glucose-lowering medicines.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: There is no basis for verifying that other treatment was absent or the same between groups.
Reason for missing information: There is no basis for verifying that other treatment was absent or the same between groups.
Required materials and conditions: Group-specific concomitant medication, adjustments, lifestyle, rescue treatment, adherence and analytical handling
Materials to obtain first: Group-specific concomitant medication, adjustments, lifestyle, rescue treatment, adherence and analytical handling
Further research: Compare concomitant treatment over time with the effect of interest to distinguish common management from drinking differences.
Remaining uncertainty: There is no basis for verifying that other treatment was absent or the same between groups. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify baseline antihypertensives, medication adjustments, rescue treatment, diet/exercise changes and actual analytical handling by group.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid attributing differences in concurrent management affecting blood pressure to lotus leaf tea.
Application exceptions: Do not require every change to be identical between groups. Match the actual effect of interest and analysis; distinguish interaction-data gaps from absent efficacy.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N12 · Can systolic-blood-pressure measurement conditions in a direct trial be verified?

Current findings: The intended endpoint is office or 24-hour systolic blood pressure, but measurement in an eligible trial is unverified. Body-fat percentage and in vitro enzyme inhibition in the evidence records are different measurements.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Direct blood-pressure devices, procedures, assessor blinding and measurement conditions by group cannot be verified.
Reason for missing information: Direct blood-pressure devices, procedures, assessor blinding and measurement conditions by group cannot be verified.
Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure measurement manual, devices, visits, repetitions and blinding material
Materials to obtain first: Direct blood-pressure measurement manual, devices, visits, repetitions and blinding material
Further research: Compare measurement procedures with result tables and attribute office and 24-hour results separately.
Remaining uncertainty: Direct blood-pressure devices, procedures, assessor blinding and measurement conditions by group cannot be verified. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify office or 24-hour measurement, device, posture, repetitions/averaging, time of day, assessor and the same procedure between groups.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting body-fat percentage or enzyme inhibition into blood-pressure values and to distinguish measurement differences from actual change.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N13 · Are blood-pressure units, final values or changes, and assessment visits verified?

Current findings: The retained evidence entries record no blood-pressure efficacy result and no human blood-pressure result, respectively. Direct mmHg final values, changes and visits are unverified.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: No direct table establishes actual blood-pressure units, timing or change definitions. Do not extend this to nonreporting throughout an unread paper.
Reason for missing information: No direct table establishes actual blood-pressure units, timing or change definitions. Do not extend this to nonreporting throughout an unread paper.
Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure result table, units, baseline/end values, visits and change definitions
Materials to obtain first: Direct blood-pressure result table, units, baseline/end values, visits and change definitions
Further research: Connect original-table result definitions with comparator and time; do not mix figures from other endpoints.
Remaining uncertainty: No direct table establishes actual blood-pressure units, timing or change definitions. Do not extend this to nonreporting throughout an unread paper. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Connect systolic-blood-pressure units, final value/change, visit and analytical direction for direct results to the original table.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning the presence of an endpoint name into reported actual blood-pressure figures.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N14 · Are allocation, measurement and analysis denominators in a direct blood-pressure trial verified?

Current findings: The direct blood-pressure denominator is unverified. Allocation of 95 participants and analysis of 60 overweight completers belong only to the Ye body-fat trial.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The direct blood-pressure analysis denominator is absent. Do not reuse 95/60 or calculate new unique participant counts.
Reason for missing information: The direct blood-pressure analysis denominator is absent. Do not reuse 95/60 or calculate new unique participant counts.
Required materials and conditions: Group-specific flowchart and blood-pressure measurement/analysis denominators for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Group-specific flowchart and blood-pressure measurement/analysis denominators for the direct trial
Further research: Compare the flow from allocation to blood-pressure analysis and distinguish the role of each denominator.
Remaining uncertainty: The direct blood-pressure analysis denominator is absent. Do not reuse 95/60 or calculate new unique participant counts. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Distinguish allocation, exposure, blood-pressure measurement and analysis counts by group; connect each denominator with its actual result.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid inheriting 95 and 60 from another endpoint as direct blood-pressure analysis counts.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N15 · Can missingness, withdrawals and their handling in a direct blood-pressure analysis be verified?

Current findings: No direct blood-pressure follow-up or missingness material is retained. The related description of 60 body-fat completers informs that analysis, not blood-pressure missing-data handling.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Missingness, loss to follow-up and handling by group in a direct trial cannot be verified. Do not calculate a new withdrawal rate from the difference between 95 and 60.
Reason for missing information: Missingness, loss to follow-up and handling by group in a direct trial cannot be verified. Do not calculate a new withdrawal rate from the difference between 95 and 60.
Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure trial flowchart, withdrawal reasons, missing-data handling and sensitivity analyses
Materials to obtain first: Direct blood-pressure trial flowchart, withdrawal reasons, missing-data handling and sensitivity analyses
Further research: Compare reasons for missing blood-pressure observations with analysis inclusion; do not estimate an unknown magnitude of bias.
Remaining uncertainty: Missingness, loss to follow-up and handling by group in a direct trial cannot be verified. Do not calculate a new withdrawal rate from the difference between 95 and 60. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify missing blood-pressure observations, discontinuation/withdrawal reasons, group differences and analysis inclusion, imputation and sensitivity handling.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid judging follow-up completeness or missing-data bias in a direct trial solely from the word completers.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N16 · Is the between-group effect estimated by a direct blood-pressure analysis verified?

Current findings: The analysis population, model and between-group estimate for a direct blood-pressure comparison are not retained. Current material contains only the body-fat trial and in vitro results.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: An actual analysis corresponding to the blood-pressure effect of interest cannot be verified. Do not assign ITT or adjusted analysis arbitrarily.
Reason for missing information: An actual analysis corresponding to the blood-pressure effect of interest cannot be verified. Do not assign ITT or adjusted analysis arbitrarily.
Required materials and conditions: Analysis population, model, effect of interest and between-group result table for the direct trial
Materials to obtain first: Analysis population, model, effect of interest and between-group result table for the direct trial
Further research: Compare the analysis plan with original results to identify an estimator appropriate for the effect of interest.
Remaining uncertainty: An actual analysis corresponding to the blood-pressure effect of interest cannot be verified. Do not assign ITT or adjusted analysis arbitrarily. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify assignment/adherence effects, ITT/PP or other analysis populations, between-/within-group distinctions and a valid analytical model.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid importing uncontrolled changes or another endpoint’s analysis as a between-group blood-pressure effect of lotus leaf tea.
Application exceptions: A valid unadjusted between-group analysis may suit the design and effect of interest. Verifying a formal effect does not always require covariate adjustment.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N17 · Can a direct between-group blood-pressure estimate and uncertainty interval be verified?

Current findings: Direct blood-pressure effect estimates, CI, SE and SD are unverified in the retained material. The original applicability-limit discussion explicitly states that unverified material does not prove an effect of 0.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: No original values establish between-group effect magnitude or interval. Do not create an interval from P values, mechanisms or related body-fat figures.
Reason for missing information: No original values establish between-group effect magnitude or interval. Do not create an interval from P values, mechanisms or related body-fat figures.
Required materials and conditions: Direct between-group blood-pressure estimate, interval, variance definition, denominator and assessment time
Materials to obtain first: Direct between-group blood-pressure estimate, interval, variance definition, denominator and assessment time
Further research: Compare reported intervals and estimands with the original model; do not calculate absent values to fill gaps.
Remaining uncertainty: No original values establish between-group effect magnitude or interval. Do not create an interval from P values, mechanisms or related body-fat figures. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Connect a reported between-group blood-pressure estimate, CI/SE/SD type, result denominator and assessment time to the original table.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning a failure to identify evidence into an effect of 0 or a sufficiently precise null difference.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N18 · Are the evidence and criteria for judging the importance of a blood-pressure change verified?

Current findings: A direct blood-pressure effect, interval and important-difference criterion for this question are not retained. The original ? and unrecorded values are retained.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Importance cannot be judged without a direct estimate and criterion. Do not adopt arbitrary minimum n, duration or mmHg thresholds.
Reason for missing information: Importance cannot be judged without a direct estimate and criterion. Do not adopt arbitrary minimum n, duration or mmHg thresholds.
Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure effect/interval and a clearly sourced important difference or application criterion
Materials to obtain first: Direct blood-pressure effect/interval and a clearly sourced important difference or application criterion
Further research: Compare effect intervals with importance evidence without arbitrarily setting new thresholds or grades.
Remaining uncertainty: Importance cannot be judged without a direct estimate and criterion. Do not adopt arbitrary minimum n, duration or mmHg thresholds. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify material allowing the actually reported interval to be compared with a justified important difference and application context for the question.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid declaring clinical sufficiency solely from significance or trial counts.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N19 · Can the prespecified plan and actual report of a direct blood-pressure trial be compared?

Current findings: The current NCT04651023 is linked to the excluded Ye body-fat trial. Plans, reports and amendments for a direct blood-pressure trial are unverified.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Material for comparing a direct prespecified plan is absent. Do not declare nonregistration, selective reporting or worldwide absence of registration.
Reason for missing information: Material for comparing a direct prespecified plan is absent. Do not declare nonregistration, selective reporting or worldwide absence of registration.
Required materials and conditions: Registration, protocol, analysis plan, complete results and amendment reasons for the direct blood-pressure trial
Materials to obtain first: Registration, protocol, analysis plan, complete results and amendment reasons for the direct blood-pressure trial
Further research: Compare planned and reported endpoints/times; preserve unfavorable and null results as well.
Remaining uncertainty: Material for comparing a direct prespecified plan is absent. Do not declare nonregistration, selective reporting or worldwide absence of registration. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Compare registration/protocol, analysis plan and reports for direct blood-pressure endpoints, times and analyses; verify reasons for changes.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid inheriting a related body-fat registration as a direct blood-pressure plan or declaring selective reporting without evidence.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N20 · Is the same direct blood-pressure comparison verified in other independent study families?

Current findings: The retained bibliography contains 2 reports in different contexts: a body-fat report and an in vitro report. Replication information for directly eligible blood-pressure families is unverified.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: No material establishes direct families or replication. Do not count the 2 reports as 2 blood-pressure trials or sum them into unique participant counts.
Reason for missing information: No material establishes direct families or replication. Do not count the 2 reports as 2 blood-pressure trials or sum them into unique participant counts.
Required materials and conditions: Direct blood-pressure trial family identities, registration, institutions, populations and result-link table
Materials to obtain first: Direct blood-pressure trial family identities, registration, institutions, populations and result-link table
Further research: Compare eligibility by family; do not count reports/registration from the same trial more than once.
Remaining uncertainty: No material establishes direct families or replication. Do not count the 2 reports as 2 blood-pressure trials or sum them into unique participant counts. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify eligible-family populations, drinking exposures, blood-pressure outcomes, comparators, times and report links to distinguish replication from recitation.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning report counts or mechanistic studies into independent replications of direct efficacy.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N21 · Was the Ye body-fat report retained separately from direct blood-pressure efficacy?

Current findings: The Ye report concerns body fat after a lotus-leaf hot-water-extract beverage. The original record contains no blood-pressure efficacy result; it retains the similar-formulation context and exclusion for population, effect and endpoint mismatch.
Verification status: Met
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: This item asks about retaining the related report’s role and exclusion reason. It does not assess verification of body-fat or direct blood-pressure effects.
Reason for missing information: None within this narrow record scope.
Required materials and conditions: Ye report title, population, body-fat endpoint, formulation, exclusion reason and original locations
Materials to obtain first: Ye report title, population, body-fat endpoint, formulation, exclusion reason and original locations
Further research: When related reports are added, compare matching and mismatched aspects of the question separately.
Remaining uncertainty: None within this narrow record scope. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Preserve both the related formulation and the exclusion reason based on mismatched population, effect and endpoint.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to retain related human material without upgrading effects outside the question into direct evidence.
Application exceptions: Successful record separation does not satisfy the direct-comparison requirement. Direct blood-pressure material remains unverified in N02 and the other actual-data questions.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01

N22 · Were Ye’s 95 and 60 retained in their original denominator roles?

Current findings: The original description is 95 allocated participants and 60 overweight completers analyzed. Both figures belong to the body-fat report and were not used as direct hypertension/systolic-blood-pressure denominators.
Verification status: Met
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The original denominator roles are retained separately. This does not establish the validity of Ye’s whole analysis or verify direct blood-pressure n.
Reason for missing information: None within this narrow record scope.
Required materials and conditions: Ye’s original denominator description and population/endpoint locations
Materials to obtain first: Ye’s original denominator description and population/endpoint locations
Further research: If further flowchart and analysis material is obtained, compare each denominator’s role without synthesizing a new withdrawal rate.
Remaining uncertainty: None within this narrow record scope. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Retain allocation of 95 and analysis of 60 overweight completers as distinct body-fat report denominators; do not use them as direct blood-pressure analysis n.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting allocation counts into analysis counts or denominators for other results.
Application exceptions: Do not newly calculate withdrawal counts, rates or causes from the difference between 95 and 60. Do not infer absent flowcharts or hypertension subgroups.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01

N23 · Is equivalence between the body-fat test beverage and hypertension-targeted lotus leaf tea verified?

Current findings: The original key explanation specifies that a 400 mL test beverage with 1–2 g lotus-leaf hot-water extract is neither a hypertension blood-pressure trial nor the same formulation as ordinary tea. Equivalence data are unverified.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Original beverage figures alone cannot establish equivalence with ordinary tea or direct blood-pressure exposure.
Reason for missing information: Original beverage figures alone cannot establish equivalence with ordinary tea or direct blood-pressure exposure.
Required materials and conditions: Manufacture, composition, raw-material/extract quantity and intake for both formulations, plus direct blood-pressure population data
Materials to obtain first: Manufacture, composition, raw-material/extract quantity and intake for both formulations, plus direct blood-pressure population data
Further research: Compare formulation and exposure equivalence using material; retain unverified application to ordinary tea.
Remaining uncertainty: Original beverage figures alone cannot establish equivalence with ordinary tea or direct blood-pressure exposure. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify manufacture, composition, exposure and application to a direct population for the 1–2 g hot-water extract/400 mL test beverage and the selected tea/infusion.
Why this condition is needed: A similar-formulation description does not prove the same product or exposure.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01

N24 · Was in vitro ACE material retained separately from human blood-pressure results?

Current findings: The second report is an in vitro ACE-inhibition experiment across plant parts, recorded as having no human participants, an in vitro enzyme-inhibition endpoint and no human blood-pressure result. Its exclusion as mechanistic/in vitro material is retained.
Verification status: Met
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: This item asks about distinguishing and retaining the study context. It does not verify in vitro precision or a human blood-pressure reduction.
Reason for missing information: None within this narrow record scope.
Required materials and conditions: In vitro design, participant description, enzyme endpoint and exclusion reason
Materials to obtain first: In vitro design, participant description, enzyme endpoint and exclusion reason
Further research: Connect mechanistic and clinical material by result type; examine human effect direction and magnitude using separate direct material.
Remaining uncertainty: None within this narrow record scope. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Retain the actual context of plant-part in vitro enzyme inhibition with no human participants; do not convert it into clinical blood-pressure figures.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid mixing the existence of a mechanism with a human treatment effect.
Application exceptions: No human participants is a design fact about this in vitro study. It does not mean 0 human lotus-related studies worldwide.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S02

N25 · To what extent are funding and author interests in the related reports verified?

Current findings: The Ye record describes industry sponsorship and company-employee authors. The ACE record describes academic research, while its retained English field explicitly leaves the actual funding source unverified. Detailed disclosures/funding scope remain unverified.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Some reported categories are available, but funding, product provision and complete disclosures remain unverified. Direct blood-pressure independence is also not established.
Reason for missing information: Some reported categories are available, but funding, product provision and complete disclosures remain unverified. Direct blood-pressure independence is also not established.
Required materials and conditions: Study-funding, product-provision, employment, patent and conflict-of-interest sections for each report
Materials to obtain first: Study-funding, product-provision, employment, patent and conflict-of-interest sections for each report
Further research: Compare funding and interest sections report by report; examine direct blood-pressure trial independence separately.
Remaining uncertainty: Some reported categories are available, but funding, product provision and complete disclosures remain unverified. Direct blood-pressure independence is also not established. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify actual study funding, product provision, employment, patents and interest disclosures in each report’s original material. Specify the funding/independence scope; category descriptions alone remain partial information.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating academic classification as proof of independent funding or industry support as automatic invalidation.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N26 · Can harm collection, discontinuations and denominators for the same population and drink be verified?

Current findings: The original safety label is Caution. The retained record states that eligible trials were not available to establish hypertension-patient dose, long-term safety, special populations or concomitant interactions. Events, discontinuations, denominators and collection methods are unverified.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Without harm-collection material for the same exposure/population, safety or incidence cannot be judged. Do not use counts in the two related reports as harm denominators.
Reason for missing information: Without harm-collection material for the same exposure/population, safety or incidence cannot be judged. Do not use counts in the two related reports as harm denominators.
Required materials and conditions: AE definitions, collection, exposure/follow-up, denominators and discontinuation data for the same population/formulation
Materials to obtain first: AE definitions, collection, exposure/follow-up, denominators and discontinuation data for the same population/formulation
Further research: Examine efficacy and harm results separately; compare collection scope and missingness.
Remaining uncertainty: Without harm-collection material for the same exposure/population, safety or incidence cannot be judged. Do not use counts in the two related reports as harm denominators. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify actual exposure, follow-up, event definitions, collection, discontinuations, denominators by group and harm records in adults with hypertension.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid turning unverified direct efficacy or absent harm figures into safety or 0 events.
Application exceptions: This table asks about blood-pressure comparisons. Harm material is not always mandatory for efficacy, but the gap must remain when making safety claims.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N27 · Are direct data available for vulnerable populations and concomitant-drug interactions?

Current findings: The original safety explanation specifies gaps for pregnancy, lactation, liver/kidney disease and antihypertensive or glucose-lowering drug interactions. Actual separate material is not retained.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: No material establishes safety in populations/interactions outside the selected blood-pressure question. Do not create personal dosing or medication-replacement instructions.
Reason for missing information: No material establishes safety in populations/interactions outside the selected blood-pressure question. Do not create personal dosing or medication-replacement instructions.
Required materials and conditions: Population-specific exposure, baseline risk, concomitant medicines, interactions and follow-up material
Materials to obtain first: Population-specific exposure, baseline risk, concomitant medicines, interactions and follow-up material
Further research: Examine special populations and concomitant use with separate eligibility; do not extrapolate from general participants.
Remaining uncertainty: No material establishes safety in populations/interactions outside the selected blood-pressure question. Do not create personal dosing or medication-replacement instructions. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify actual populations, exposures and outcomes for pregnancy, lactation, liver/kidney disease and concomitant antihypertensive/glucose-lowering medicines.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating single oral tea as proof of safety across all populations and drug combinations.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N28 · Is cardiovascular-event prevention assessed as a mandatory endpoint in this blood-pressure table?

Current findings: The original claim here is reduced systolic blood pressure. Cardiovascular-event prevention, mortality and medication replacement are not added as endpoints of this table.
Verification status: Not applicable
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: No event-prevention claim was assigned, so this extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct blood-pressure missingness was not changed to Not applicable.
Reason for missing information: No event-prevention claim was assigned, so this extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct blood-pressure missingness was not changed to Not applicable.
Required materials and conditions: Direct event, comparator, follow-up and denominator data if an extension claim is made
Materials to obtain first: Direct event, comparator, follow-up and denominator data if an extension claim is made
Further research: If an event extension is requested, examine a separate independent boundary and required material.
Remaining uncertainty: No event-prevention claim was assigned, so this extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct blood-pressure missingness was not changed to Not applicable. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: When the selected claim is limited to systolic-blood-pressure comparison, treat event prevention as a separate direct claim rather than an always-mandatory blood-pressure endpoint.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to distinguish a numerical-change question from event-prevention or medication-replacement questions.
Application exceptions: Do not always require event material. Not applicable is limited to the current extension scope; it does not establish absent event effects or safety.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N29 · Does this table establish an optimal dose or persistence after discontinuation?

Current findings: This table concerns systolic-blood-pressure comparisons; it does not establish an optimal dose, post-discontinuation persistence or all subgroup effects. Actual direct dose and duration remain unverified in N05 and N06.
Verification status: Not applicable
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Optimal dose and persistence are outside the original claim; only that extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct-trial dose/duration gaps remain.
Reason for missing information: Optimal dose and persistence are outside the original claim; only that extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct-trial dose/duration gaps remain.
Required materials and conditions: Direct dose comparisons, post-discontinuation follow-up and prespecified subgroup material if an extension is claimed
Materials to obtain first: Direct dose comparisons, post-discontinuation follow-up and prespecified subgroup material if an extension is claimed
Further research: Examine direct comparisons and follow-up within a new independent boundary for each extension question.
Remaining uncertainty: Optimal dose and persistence are outside the original claim; only that extension obligation is Not applicable. Direct-trial dose/duration gaps remain. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: If the original claim does not include dose optimization or post-discontinuation comparisons, do not add those judgments. Actual main-trial dose and duration remain separately required.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid confusing unverified main-trial dose with unrequested optimal-dose/persistence claims.
Application exceptions: Do not remove the need for actual main-trial dose/duration. Do not create arbitrary minimum-dose, duration or subgroup obligations.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N30 · Were retained summaries actually read distinguished from external-material reading status?

Current findings: The retained review records reading the full current input and designated locations for this item. External PubMed, paper, PMC, trial-registration and new method full texts were not accessed, acquired or read.
Verification status: Met
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: This narrow distinction matches the actions recorded in the retained review. It does not establish verification of external-material contents.
Reason for missing information: None within this narrow record scope.
Required materials and conditions: Actual reading scope, original locations, file fingerprints and reading history for each material
Materials to obtain first: Actual reading scope, original locations, file fingerprints and reading history for each material
Further research: If access is actually performed, record a separate event, date and acquired scope, then update the badge.
Remaining uncertainty: None within this narrow record scope. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Separate actual reading of the retained summary from unattempted/unread external bibliography, abstracts, full papers and registration for each material.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid treating the presence of a URL, PMID, PMCID or NCT as successful reading of external full text.
Application exceptions: External access not attempted does not mean inaccessible. Summary-read badges refer only to exact retained locations and file fingerprints.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N31 · Are historical reading levels and actual access dates of original materials verified report by report?

Current findings: The two citations have no individual access level or access date. The original review date is 2026-09-08 and the English correction date is 2026-09-14. Report-specific actual access dates and historical full-text access remain unrecorded.
Verification status: Unverified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Actual report-specific access and dates cannot be verified because they are absent from the original material. Do not inherit global dates as individual reading dates.
Reason for missing information: Actual report-specific access and dates cannot be verified because they are absent from the original material. Do not inherit global dates as individual reading dates.
Required materials and conditions: Report-specific original-material access, acquisition, reading level, actual dates and material-type records
Materials to obtain first: Report-specific original-material access, acquisition, reading level, actual dates and material-type records
Further research: When original access history is added, compare the included document’s history separately from its underlying original materials.
Remaining uncertainty: Actual report-specific access and dates cannot be verified because they are absent from the original material. Do not inherit global dates as individual reading dates. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify each original material’s access level/date or actual access log; distinguish them from global review and correction dates.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid issuing current or historical full-text reading status solely from dates or bibliography links.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N32 · To what extent are the scope and currency of the retained search record verified?

Current findings: The original research-review description records PubMed/ClinicalTrials.gov combinations of Nelumbo/lotus leaf/tea/infusion/hypertension/blood pressure, NCT04651023, and animal/in vitro exclusions. Exact searches, result lists and search dates are absent from the current input; no new search was conducted.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Original databases, keywords and some exclusion context are verified, but reproducible complete searching, selection scope and currency are not.
Reason for missing information: Original databases, keywords and some exclusion context are verified, but reproducible complete searching, selection scope and currency are not.
Required materials and conditions: Original search dates, strings, result lists, selection/exclusion records and registration-check scope
Materials to obtain first: Original search dates, strings, result lists, selection/exclusion records and registration-check scope
Further research: In subsequent updates, preserve search/selection histories separately and limit absence wording to checked scope and dates.
Remaining uncertainty: Original databases, keywords and some exclusion context are verified, but reproducible complete searching, selection scope and currency are not. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Verify original search dates, complete search strings, result lists and selection/exclusion procedures to reproduce the search for directly eligible comparisons. Databases and partial keywords alone require distinguishing verified parts from gaps.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid expanding one search-record sentence into a complete current literature review or proof of worldwide research absence.
Application exceptions: Do not fill facts unverified in the retained material with evidence about other lotus parts, formulations, populations or endpoints. Unverified material does not prove an effect of 0 or the worldwide absence of research.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N33 · Were the original ?, unrecorded values and human-study absence flag distinguished from related human material?

Current findings: The original grade is ?, the score and evidence axes are unrecorded, and the human-study absence flag is true. These original values are retained. The related Ye human body-fat trial exists, while direct blood-pressure comparisons remain unverified within the retained scope.
Verification status: Met
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: This item asks about retaining original values and interpretation boundaries; that record was completed. No clinical regrading of the flag or verification of 0 studies worldwide was performed.
Reason for missing information: None within this narrow record scope.
Required materials and conditions: Original grade, score, axes, related human evidence, direct boundary and locations of absence wording
Materials to obtain first: Original grade, score, axes, related human evidence, direct boundary and locations of absence wording
Further research: If the manuscript is corrected, retain whole before/after versions and event reasons; distinguish verdict changes from changes in table attribution.
Remaining uncertainty: None within this narrow record scope. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Retain the original grade ?, unrecorded score/axes and true human-study absence flag; separately explain the related human body-fat trial and unverified direct blood-pressure material.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to retain the original status without interpreting an absence flag as worldwide human-evidence absence or an effect of 0.
Application exceptions: Do not import absent evidence-status, editorial-review, material-list, study-family or evidence-cutoff fields from adjacent cases. Retain absent, unrecorded, false and empty-list states separately.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N34 · Were the English correction event and unchanged original-verdict scope retained?

Current findings: The original correction record states that on 2026-09-14,16 placeholder fields in the English evidence table were replaced with concrete English matching the retained Korean, without new research or regrading; ?, score, citations and verdict date were retained.
Verification status: Met
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: The original correction event record and retained scope are preserved. Historical external full-text checking or new clinical certification is not reissued.
Reason for missing information: None within this narrow record scope.
Required materials and conditions: Before/after correction versions, change areas, event date and unchanged-grade record
Materials to obtain first: Before/after correction versions, change areas, event date and unchanged-grade record
Further research: For later corrections, retain the whole original and record wording, added evidence and verdict changes as separate events.
Remaining uncertainty: None within this narrow record scope. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Connect the original record of the 2026-09-14 correction of 16 English evidence-table fields with retention of grade, score, citations and verdict date without new research or regrading.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid converting a translation/wording correction into new clinical evidence or verdict validation.
Application exceptions: If the whole historical pre-correction manuscript is absent from this input, do not claim new access/comparison. This concerns retention of the original correction record.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02

N35 · Can the related reports’ identifiers and study-family links actually be verified?

Current findings: The retained bibliography identifies Ye 2022 with PMID 34852695, DOI 10.1080/14786419.2021.2010196 and NCT04651023. The other mechanistic report has PMID 37050065 and PMCID PMC10097295. These are retained local links; external identity and registration contents were not compared.
Verification status: Partly verified
Materials actually read: The retained Korean/English summaries and case-specific condition/application records were read. External abstracts, full texts, registration, protocols and analysis plans remain unread; access was not attempted.
Why unverified: Local identifiers and related contexts exist, but external identity and family comparison against original papers/registration remain unverified. Directly eligible blood-pressure family and unique participant counts are unrecorded.
Reason for missing information: Local identifiers and related contexts exist, but external identity and family comparison against original papers/registration remain unverified. Directly eligible blood-pressure family and unique participant counts are unrecorded.
Required materials and conditions: Original-paper/registration identity comparisons and actual study-family/result links for each report
Materials to obtain first: Original-paper/registration identity comparisons and actual study-family/result links for each report
Further research: Compare identifiers and originals; update same/different/unknown relationships only to the established level.
Remaining uncertainty: Local identifiers and related contexts exist, but external identity and family comparison against original papers/registration remain unverified. Directly eligible blood-pressure family and unique participant counts are unrecorded. No new effect, interval, denominator, incidence or grade was calculated or reassessed.
Conditions for verification: Compare actual report title, PMID, DOI, PMCID and NCT identities and study/endpoint links against original papers/registration. Local identifiers alone remain partial information with the uncompared scope explicit.
Why this condition is needed: Needed to avoid counting related reports, registration and bibliography entries as independent blood-pressure trials or new participant families.
Application exceptions: S01/S02 are local bibliography-array tracking IDs, not original material-ID keys. Do not create new original-material collections from absent native material/study-family lists.
Referenced methods: Existing method principles distinguish population, plant part, manufacture, drinking exposure, comparator, timing, denominators, missingness, measurement, between-group effects, intervals, plans, study families, funding and harms. Detailed conditions are Chamgap’s own application.

Related sources S01 S02