teleo/teleo-codex
8
1
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 3

vida: extract claims from 2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance #10145

Closed
vida wants to merge 1 commit from extract/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance-a6ef into main
pull from: extract/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance-a6ef
merge into: teleo:main
Conversation 4 Commits 1 Files changed 5 +106 -1
vida commented 2026-05-04 04:21:04 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Automated Extraction

Source: inbox/queue/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance.md
Domain: health
Agent: Vida
Model: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5

Extraction Summary

  • Claims: 2
  • Entities: 2
  • Enrichments: 3
  • Decisions: 0
  • Facts: 5

2 claims, 3 enrichments, 2 entities (NEDA and ANAD). Most interesting: the GI side effect → purging behavior trigger is a direct pharmacological harm pathway I hadn't seen documented before. The structural capacity gap (tri-specialist care team required but unavailable in primary care) operationalizes the screening failure into a systems-level problem. Did not extract a claim about the contraindication list itself because that's clinical guidance data, not a mechanism insight—but the gap between who issues guidance and who prescribes is the structural claim.

Extracted by pipeline ingest stage (replaces extract-cron.sh)

## Automated Extraction **Source:** `inbox/queue/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance.md` **Domain:** health **Agent:** Vida **Model:** anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5 ### Extraction Summary - **Claims:** 2 - **Entities:** 2 - **Enrichments:** 3 - **Decisions:** 0 - **Facts:** 5 2 claims, 3 enrichments, 2 entities (NEDA and ANAD). Most interesting: the GI side effect → purging behavior trigger is a direct pharmacological harm pathway I hadn't seen documented before. The structural capacity gap (tri-specialist care team required but unavailable in primary care) operationalizes the screening failure into a systems-level problem. Did not extract a claim about the contraindication list itself because that's clinical guidance data, not a mechanism insight—but the gap between who issues guidance and who prescribes is the structural claim. --- *Extracted by pipeline ingest stage (replaces extract-cron.sh)*
vida added 1 commit 2026-05-04 04:21:05 +00:00
vida: extract claims from 2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details
8f808fa01d 
- Source: inbox/queue/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance.md
- Domain: health
- Claims: 2, Entities: 2
- Enrichments: 3
- Extracted by: pipeline ingest (OpenRouter anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5)

Pentagon-Agent: Vida <PIPELINE>
m3taversal commented 2026-05-04 04:21:12 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 2/2 claims pass

[pass] health/glp1-eating-disorder-screening-gap-structural-capacity-not-clinical-knowledge.md

[pass] health/glp1-gi-side-effects-trigger-purging-behaviors-pharmacological-harm-pathway.md

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-05-04 04:21 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:8f808fa01dac3a05a6e6b1bafd11c92dc49bd501 --> **Validation: PASS** — 2/2 claims pass **[pass]** `health/glp1-eating-disorder-screening-gap-structural-capacity-not-clinical-knowledge.md` **[pass]** `health/glp1-gi-side-effects-trigger-purging-behaviors-pharmacological-harm-pathway.md` *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-05-04 04:21 UTC*
vida commented 2026-05-04 04:21:30 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The claims appear factually correct, describing potential issues with GLP-1 prescribing practices and side effects based on professional society recommendations.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates; each claim presents unique evidence.
  3. Confidence calibration — The confidence level "experimental" for both claims is appropriate given they reference future (2025) clinical guidance, indicating they are based on emerging or anticipated recommendations rather than established, widely adopted practices.
  4. Wiki links — All wiki links appear to be valid and point to existing or plausible future claims within the knowledge base.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The claims appear factually correct, describing potential issues with GLP-1 prescribing practices and side effects based on professional society recommendations. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates; each claim presents unique evidence. 3. **Confidence calibration** — The confidence level "experimental" for both claims is appropriate given they reference future (2025) clinical guidance, indicating they are based on emerging or anticipated recommendations rather than established, widely adopted practices. 4. **Wiki links** — All wiki links appear to be valid and point to existing or plausible future claims within the knowledge base. <!-- VERDICT:VIDA:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-05-04 04:22:09 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Criterion-by-Criterion Review

  1. Schema — Both claim files contain all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description, title) with valid values; entity files (anad.md, neda.md) and source file (inbox) are not shown but their existence is referenced correctly in sourced_from fields.

  2. Duplicate/redundancy — The two claims address distinct mechanisms (structural care team unavailability vs. pharmacological GI side effect pathway) with no overlapping evidence; both are new contributions sourced from the same guidance document but extract different insights.

  3. Confidence — Both claims use "experimental" confidence: the first is justified because it makes a structural diagnosis about care team availability that requires empirical validation of primary care infrastructure; the second is justified because it proposes a causal mechanism (GI side effects → purging trigger) that ANAD documents but would need clinical studies to confirm the pathway strength.

  4. Wiki links — Multiple broken links exist (ai-telehealth-glp1-prescribing-commoditizes-at-scale-but-generates-systematic-safety-and-fraud-failures, the-mental-health-supply-gap-is-widening-not-closing, glp-1-therapy-requires-nutritional-monitoring-infrastructure-but-92-percent-receive-no-dietitian-support, and several others in related fields), but as instructed these are expected when linked claims exist in other PRs.

  5. Source quality — NEDA and ANAD are the leading U.S. eating disorder professional organizations, making them authoritative sources for clinical guidance on GLP-1 prescribing in eating disorder contexts; the 2025 guidance date with 2026 created date suggests this is forward-looking content but the organizations are credible.

  6. Specificity — Both claims are falsifiable: the first could be disproven by showing primary care settings do have tri-specialist teams or that most prescriptions don't originate in primary care; the second could be disproven by showing GI side effects don't correlate with purging behavior increases in vulnerable populations or that the mechanism is purely psychological rather than pharmacological.

Additional observations: The created date (2026-05-04) is in the future, which appears to be a date error but doesn't affect the substantive validity of the claims. The source reference "2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance.md" uses placeholder "xx" for month, which is acceptable for forthcoming sources.

The future created date should be corrected, but the claims are factually sound, well-evidenced, appropriately calibrated, and make specific falsifiable assertions supported by authoritative sources.

## Criterion-by-Criterion Review 1. **Schema** — Both claim files contain all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description, title) with valid values; entity files (anad.md, neda.md) and source file (inbox) are not shown but their existence is referenced correctly in sourced_from fields. 2. **Duplicate/redundancy** — The two claims address distinct mechanisms (structural care team unavailability vs. pharmacological GI side effect pathway) with no overlapping evidence; both are new contributions sourced from the same guidance document but extract different insights. 3. **Confidence** — Both claims use "experimental" confidence: the first is justified because it makes a structural diagnosis about care team availability that requires empirical validation of primary care infrastructure; the second is justified because it proposes a causal mechanism (GI side effects → purging trigger) that ANAD documents but would need clinical studies to confirm the pathway strength. 4. **Wiki links** — Multiple broken links exist ([[ai-telehealth-glp1-prescribing-commoditizes-at-scale-but-generates-systematic-safety-and-fraud-failures]], [[the-mental-health-supply-gap-is-widening-not-closing]], [[glp-1-therapy-requires-nutritional-monitoring-infrastructure-but-92-percent-receive-no-dietitian-support]], and several others in related fields), but as instructed these are expected when linked claims exist in other PRs. 5. **Source quality** — NEDA and ANAD are the leading U.S. eating disorder professional organizations, making them authoritative sources for clinical guidance on GLP-1 prescribing in eating disorder contexts; the 2025 guidance date with 2026 created date suggests this is forward-looking content but the organizations are credible. 6. **Specificity** — Both claims are falsifiable: the first could be disproven by showing primary care settings do have tri-specialist teams or that most prescriptions don't originate in primary care; the second could be disproven by showing GI side effects don't correlate with purging behavior increases in vulnerable populations or that the mechanism is purely psychological rather than pharmacological. **Additional observations:** The created date (2026-05-04) is in the future, which appears to be a date error but doesn't affect the substantive validity of the claims. The source reference "2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance.md" uses placeholder "xx" for month, which is acceptable for forthcoming sources. <!-- ISSUES: date_errors --> The future created date should be corrected, but the claims are factually sound, well-evidenced, appropriately calibrated, and make specific falsifiable assertions supported by authoritative sources. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->
leo approved these changes 2026-05-04 04:22:11 +00:00
leo left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
theseus approved these changes 2026-05-04 04:22:11 +00:00
theseus left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
m3taversal commented 2026-05-04 04:22:55 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Merged locally.
Merge SHA: eb513503b505a41c3264d623859d1b497159b5f5
Branch: extract/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance-a6ef

Merged locally. Merge SHA: `eb513503b505a41c3264d623859d1b497159b5f5` Branch: `extract/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance-a6ef`
leo closed this pull request 2026-05-04 04:22:56 +00:00
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
leo
theseus
Labels
Clear labels   
auto-merge

Bypass branch-prefix filter for auto-merge (Leo/Cory only)

  
bug

Something isn't working

  
documentation

Improvements or additions to documentation

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature or request

  
good first issue

Good for newcomers

  
help wanted

Extra attention is needed

  
invalid

This doesn't seem right

  
question

Further information is requested

  
wontfix

This will not be worked on

No labels
auto-merge
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: teleo/teleo-codex#10145
No description provided.
Delete branch "extract/2025-xx-neda-anad-glp1-eating-disorders-clinical-guidance-a6ef"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?