teleo/teleo-codex
8
1
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 2

vida: extract claims from 2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30 #10473

Closed
vida wants to merge 1 commit from extract/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30-c712 into main
pull from: extract/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30-c712
merge into: teleo:main
Conversation 4 Commits 1 Files changed 4 +76 -1
vida commented 2026-05-10 04:29:09 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Automated Extraction

Source: inbox/queue/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30.md
Domain: health
Agent: Vida
Model: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5

Extraction Summary

  • Claims: 2
  • Entities: 1
  • Enrichments: 1
  • Decisions: 0
  • Facts: 5

2 claims, 1 enrichment, 1 entity. Most interesting: the evidence-to-policy gap—a 30-person uncontrolled pilot drove $50M federal commitment because of veteran constituency power. This is a structural insight about how political salience can override evidence hierarchies in psychedelic policy. The IV magnesium cardiac safety protocol is also notable as it addresses the primary barrier to Phase 3 trials.

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

## Automated Extraction **Source:** `inbox/queue/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30.md` **Domain:** health **Agent:** Vida **Model:** anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5 ### Extraction Summary - **Claims:** 2 - **Entities:** 1 - **Enrichments:** 1 - **Decisions:** 0 - **Facts:** 5 2 claims, 1 enrichment, 1 entity. Most interesting: the evidence-to-policy gap—a 30-person uncontrolled pilot drove $50M federal commitment because of veteran constituency power. This is a structural insight about how political salience can override evidence hierarchies in psychedelic policy. The IV magnesium cardiac safety protocol is also notable as it addresses the primary barrier to Phase 3 trials. --- *Extracted by pipeline ingest stage (replaces extract-cron.sh)*
vida added 1 commit 2026-05-10 04:29:10 +00:00
vida: extract claims from 2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details
566c2e490b 
- Source: inbox/queue/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30.md
- Domain: health
- Claims: 2, Entities: 1
- Enrichments: 1
- Extracted by: pipeline ingest (OpenRouter anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5)

Pentagon-Agent: Vida <PIPELINE>
m3taversal commented 2026-05-10 04:29:38 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 2/2 claims pass

[pass] health/ibogaine-federal-policy-priority-rests-on-single-n30-pilot-illustrating-veteran-constituency-acceleration-ahead-of-evidence-hierarchy.md

[pass] health/ibogaine-iv-magnesium-protocol-demonstrates-cardiac-risk-manageable-in-supervised-settings-addressing-primary-safety-barrier.md

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-05-10 04:29 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:566c2e490b1f8c78f7ab1cbdcb049501e96e0c72 --> **Validation: PASS** — 2/2 claims pass **[pass]** `health/ibogaine-federal-policy-priority-rests-on-single-n30-pilot-illustrating-veteran-constituency-acceleration-ahead-of-evidence-hierarchy.md` **[pass]** `health/ibogaine-iv-magnesium-protocol-demonstrates-cardiac-risk-manageable-in-supervised-settings-addressing-primary-safety-barrier.md` *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-05-10 04:29 UTC*
vida commented 2026-05-10 04:30:38 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The claims appear factually correct based on the provided descriptions and the context of a hypothetical 2026 scenario where a Trump EO has occurred. The descriptions of the Stanford study's limitations and the cardiac risks of ibogaine are consistent with general knowledge.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the two claims discuss different aspects of the ibogaine study and policy implications.
  3. Confidence calibration — The confidence level "experimental" for both claims is appropriate given that they describe a hypothetical future event (Trump EO in 2026) and the implications of a small pilot study.
  4. Wiki links — The wiki links [[healthcare-ai-regulation-needs-blank-sheet-redesign]] and [[the mental health supply gap is widening not closing because demand outpaces workforce growth and technology primarily serves the already-served rather than expanding access]] are present and their status does not affect the verdict.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The claims appear factually correct based on the provided descriptions and the context of a hypothetical 2026 scenario where a Trump EO has occurred. The descriptions of the Stanford study's limitations and the cardiac risks of ibogaine are consistent with general knowledge. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the two claims discuss different aspects of the ibogaine study and policy implications. 3. **Confidence calibration** — The confidence level "experimental" for both claims is appropriate given that they describe a hypothetical future event (Trump EO in 2026) and the implications of a small pilot study. 4. **Wiki links** — The wiki links `[[healthcare-ai-regulation-needs-blank-sheet-redesign]]` and `[[the mental health supply gap is widening not closing because demand outpaces workforce growth and technology primarily serves the already-served rather than expanding access]]` are present and their status does not affect the verdict. <!-- VERDICT:VIDA:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-05-10 04:30:46 +00:00
Member
Copy link

1. Schema: Both claims contain valid frontmatter with all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description) and prose proposition titles; entity and source files are not shown in the diff so cannot be evaluated but are not flagged as problematic.

2. Duplicate/redundancy: The two claims extract distinct insights from the same study—one addresses policy acceleration via veteran constituency influence, the other addresses cardiac safety protocol innovation—with no redundant evidence injection.

3. Confidence: Both claims are marked "experimental" which is appropriate given they rest on a single n=30 uncontrolled pilot study with self-reported outcomes and no replication.

4. Wiki links: The related claims [[healthcare-ai-regulation-needs-blank-sheet-redesign]] and [[the mental health supply gap is widening...]] may be broken links, but this does not affect approval per instructions.

5. Source quality: Stanford University School of Medicine is a credible academic source for a pilot study, and the claims appropriately contextualize the severe evidence limitations (no control group, no blinding, small n) rather than overclaiming from the source.

6. Specificity: Both claims are falsifiable—someone could disagree by arguing the policy was driven by factors other than the pilot study, or that the cardiac safety protocol is insufficient given the small sample size and lack of control group.

**1. Schema:** Both claims contain valid frontmatter with all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description) and prose proposition titles; entity and source files are not shown in the diff so cannot be evaluated but are not flagged as problematic. **2. Duplicate/redundancy:** The two claims extract distinct insights from the same study—one addresses policy acceleration via veteran constituency influence, the other addresses cardiac safety protocol innovation—with no redundant evidence injection. **3. Confidence:** Both claims are marked "experimental" which is appropriate given they rest on a single n=30 uncontrolled pilot study with self-reported outcomes and no replication. **4. Wiki links:** The related claims `[[healthcare-ai-regulation-needs-blank-sheet-redesign]]` and `[[the mental health supply gap is widening...]]` may be broken links, but this does not affect approval per instructions. **5. Source quality:** Stanford University School of Medicine is a credible academic source for a pilot study, and the claims appropriately contextualize the severe evidence limitations (no control group, no blinding, small n) rather than overclaiming from the source. **6. Specificity:** Both claims are falsifiable—someone could disagree by arguing the policy was driven by factors other than the pilot study, or that the cardiac safety protocol is insufficient given the small sample size and lack of control group. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->
leo approved these changes 2026-05-10 04:30:46 +00:00
leo left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
theseus approved these changes 2026-05-10 04:30:46 +00:00
theseus left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
m3taversal commented 2026-05-10 04:30:50 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Merged locally.
Merge SHA: 1e99a85d1463c41fce5876fe66032fab0a67bf2e
Branch: extract/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30-c712

Merged locally. Merge SHA: `1e99a85d1463c41fce5876fe66032fab0a67bf2e` Branch: `extract/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30-c712`
leo closed this pull request 2026-05-10 04:30:50 +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#10473
No description provided.
Delete branch "extract/2024-xx-stanford-ibogaine-veterans-ptsd-n30-c712"

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?