Audit: QRS - Acetyl Hexapeptide-8 for Skin Rejuvenation

Audit conducted on 26/06/2026 13:58 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 91
Passed 86
Failed 0
N/A 5
Pass Rate 100.00%
  • Total = Passed + Failed + N/A
  • Pass Rate = Passed / (Passed + Failed) × 100
  • N/A items are excluded from the pass rate calculation

1. General Rules

# Description Result Comments
1.1 Every claim, magnitude, label, recommendation, and statement in the QRS is literally supported by content in the source ER. 🟢 All content (protocol, time-to-effect, benefits, risks, monitoring, qualitative) traces to the ER.
1.2 Where the ER uses cautious phrasing (“not formally studied”, “None documented in human trials to date”, “theoretical concern”, “data are limited”), the QRS uses the same phrasing. 🟢 “Whether enough reaches the muscle layer is unresolved” and “Theoretical neuromuscular effects” mirror ER caution.
1.3 The QRS never strengthens an ER claim (e.g., “not formally studied” → “not required”) or softens one (e.g., “do not use during pregnancy” → “use with caution during pregnancy”). 🟢 Pregnancy kept as “(precautionary)”, matching the ER’s precautionary framing.
1.4 The QRS does not relabel an ER fact under a different decision category. A “Benefit-Modifying Factor” from ER section is not surfaced as a “Caution”; a “Risk-Modifying Factor” is not surfaced as a “Side Effect”; etc. 🟢 Contraindications and Key Interactions both drawn from the ER’s “Key Interactions & Contraindications” section; benefits/risks from their own sections.
1.5 PubMed IDs, study citations, expert names, clinical trial identifiers (NCT*), and brand names appear in the QRS only if they appear in the source ER for the same fact. 🟢 Only “Argireline” (a brand name present throughout the ER) appears; no PMIDs/NCTs introduced.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No new authors, organizations, or sources beyond the ER.

2. Focus, Tone & Audience

# Description Result Comments
2.1 The QRS follows the tone of the ER, which is determined by the ER’s own language, phrasing, and framing. 🟢 Objective, evidence-weighted tone matching the ER.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Balanced, accessible framing throughout.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Presents evidence, not directives.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 No advisory verbs; footer disclaimer present.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 Descriptive phrasing only.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person address.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Plain-language summary; technical terms minimal.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Compact card layout, terse items.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 No direct address.
2.10 The target audience is health- and longevity-oriented adults who are risk-aware, proactive, and actively seeking to optimize health or apply the intervention under review. 🟢 Framing fits the proactive audience.
2.11 The target audience is willing to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes as well as follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort. 🟢 Maintenance-dependent protocol framed accordingly.
2.12 The document is NOT written for the general population, who are unwilling to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes or follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort. 🟢 Not population-level framing.
2.13 Framing, takeaways, and risk/benefit weighting throughout the document reflect this audience, including where an intervention’s signal for the average person differs from its signal for this audience. 🟢 Risk/benefit weighting reflects the ER’s audience framing.
2.14 The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) are quoted verbatim. 🟢 No “anti-aging” usage.
2.15 The document’s own voice uses formal clinical and scientific terminology, not colloquial or consumer-grade language (e.g., “oral medication” not “pill(s)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt. 🟢 Uses “peptide”, “injections”, “irritation” — formal register.

3. Template Integrity

# Description Result Comments
3.1 The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified (card/section headings, gate headings, tier labels, Monitoring column headers) 🟢 “Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”, “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”, tier labels, and “Marker”/”Target”/”Why” all intact.
3.2 All “” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 All template spans present; repeatable marker/qualitative rows instantiated as numbered spans.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 No unaddressed spans were altered.

4. Formatting

# Description Result Comments
4.1 When the source ER section is empty, the QRS uses the ER’s own empty-state phrasing verbatim. Typical phrasings are “None documented in human trials to date” and “Not formally studied” 🟢 High benefit/risk tiers (empty in ER) are hidden via display:none, not filled with empty-state text — consistent with section 12.5/13.5.
4.2 Where the ER presents a bulleted item as “Label: content”, the QRS uses the ER’s bold label verbatim as the cell or row label. 🟢 Protocol labels (Application/Concentration/Duration) and benefit/risk tier labels match ER intent.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Tier and marker labels preserved.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji indicators in the QRS body.
4.5 The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page. 🟢 Content condensed into single-page card layout.

5. Metadata

# Description Result Comments
5.1 The metadata is placed inside a single HTML comment that is the first element after “<!doctype html>” and before any other comment, head, or body content. 🟢 Metadata comment is the first element after the doctype (lines 2–13).
5.2 Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML. 🟢 YAML delimited by “—” at lines 3 and 12.
5.3 The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS and is not surfaced by any other element on the sheet. 🟢 Enclosed in HTML comment; not rendered.
5.4 All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting. 🟢 All values trimmed and unquoted; none require quoting.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 er_filename: acetyl_hexapeptide_8_skin_2026-0626-1154_Opus_ER.md
5.6 Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]” 🟢 qrs_prompt_version: 26.5.18 matches QRS.md.
5.7 Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430) 🟢 qrs_creation_date: 2026-0626-1154
5.8 The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]” 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus
5.9 The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT) 🟢 “Opus” — single word.
5.10 The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]” 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 4.8
5.11 The full name of the AI consists of the [qrs_creator_ai_nickname] and the model version number and no additional qualifier (e.g., Opus 4.6, Sonnet 3.2, Grok 4.5, Gemini 3.1, ChatGPT 5.4) 🟢 “Opus 4.8” — nickname plus version, no qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 qrs_filename: acetyl_hexapeptide_8_skin_2026-0626-1154_Opus_QRS.html
5.13 All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting. 🟢 All values clean and trimmed.

6. Page Title & Header

# Description Result Comments
6.1 [page_title] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter followed by “ - Quick Reference Sheet” (e.g., “Intervention - Quick Reference Sheet”). The [canonical_topic] is HTML-entity-encoded as needed (e.g., &amp; for &) 🟢 “Acetyl Hexapeptide-8 for Skin Rejuvenation - Quick Reference Sheet”; no entities needed.
6.2 [header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., &amp; for &) 🟢 “Acetyl Hexapeptide-8 for Skin Rejuvenation” matches canonical_topic.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 “06/26/2026” from 2026-0626.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 “Opus 4.8”.
6.5 No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker. 🟢 Header contains only title and subline.

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section 🟢 Distills the ER Conclusion (lines 400–404).
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words 🟢 58 words.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Needle-free, well-tolerated, penetration uncertainty, mild/maintenance-dependent benefit, hydration more believable — all in the Conclusion.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 Plain language throughout.
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trial citations.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No statistics.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Sourced from ER “Populations who should avoid it” (line 262).
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 Allergy and active dermatitis/open skin/sunburn captured.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Two <li> items.
8.4 Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact. 🟢 Concise; no trailing clauses.
8.5 Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible. 🟢 “(until healed)” preserved from the ER.
8.6 When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol. 🟢 No ranking notation present.
8.7 If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Contraindications exist, so the condition does not apply.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Drawn from OTC/retinoid/pregnancy bullets (lines 254, 252, 262).
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 Exfoliating acids/benzoyl peroxide, retinoids, pregnancy — none duplicate the stop items.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Three <li> items.
9.4 Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact. 🟢 Concise; trailing clauses stripped.
9.5 Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — example drug lists, time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible. 🟢 “(glycolic, salicylic, lactic)”, “(tretinoin)”, “(precautionary)” preserved.
9.6 When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol. 🟢 No ranking notation present.
9.7 If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Key Interactions exist, so the condition does not apply.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 From ER “Therapeutic Protocol” (lines 284–286).
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Application frequency, concentration, duration — the key actionable parameters.
10.3 If less that three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing. N/A Three actionable aspects exist, so the condition does not apply.
10.4 All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section. 🟢 All three sets fully populated from the ER.

11. Time to Effect

# Description Result Comments
11.1 The three sets of [time] items cover the three most important time-to-effect aspects from the ER 🟢 Visible change ~4 weeks, earliest ~15 days, optimal ~28–30 days (ER line 333).
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Ordered visible → earliest → optimal, consistent with the ER’s progression.
11.3 If less that three distinct time-to-effect aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing. N/A Three time-to-effect aspects exist, so the condition does not apply.
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢 All three sets populated from the ER.
11.5 If the ER does not provide any information on time to effect, the section is removed completely from the Protocol Panel N/A The ER provides time-to-effect data, so the condition does not apply.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 From ER Expected Benefits (lines 146–182).
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four variables present.
12.3 Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact. 🟢 Bare benefit names only.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 “(oily-skin)” is the ER’s own plain-language gloss within the item title, not an effect size, sample note, or study reference.
12.5 If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing. 🟢 benefits_high set to display:none (no High items in ER).

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 From ER Potential Risks (lines 202–232).
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four variables present.
13.3 Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact. 🟢 Bare risk names only.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical content carried through.
13.5 If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing. 🟢 risks_high set to display:none (no High items in ER).

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 From ER Monitoring table (lines 363–368).
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All four markers (wrinkle depth, hydration, surface texture, local tolerability) present.
14.3 [monitoring_cadence] is populated with the monitoring cadence/frequency derived from the ER Monitoring section. It is not left with placeholder text or empty. 🟢 “Baseline photo, then reassess at ~4 weeks, again at 8–12 weeks, and thereafter every 3–6 months” (ER line 359).

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 From ER qualitative markers (lines 372–378).
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All four qualitative markers present.

Issues 26/06/2026 13:58

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 26/06/2026 13:53

  1. 12.3 / 12.4 — Added parenthetical qualifier in benefit: benefits_medium reads “Reduction in dynamic wrinkle depth (conflicted); …” (line 524); per 12.3/12.4 benefit items carry just the key fact with parenthetical content stripped, so “(conflicted)” should be removed.

Fixes 26/06/2026 13:53

  1. 12.3 / 12.4 — Stripped added parenthetical: Removed the “(conflicted)” parenthetical qualifier from benefits_medium, leaving the bare key fact “Reduction in dynamic wrinkle depth; improved skin hydration and surface texture”.