{
  "schemaVersion": 1,
  "workId": "BRC-2026-W001",
  "claims": [
    { "id": "C1", "claim": "A global cold–heat questionnaire provides a useful brief common language but only moderate agreement with practitioner classification.", "support": [1], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "Agreement with practitioner judgment does not independently validate a biological construct.", "status": "supported-with-limit" },
    { "id": "C2", "claim": "Subjective cold sensation and instrumented temperature are treated as non-equivalent by Korean-medicine experts.", "support": [2], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "Expert preference is not outcome validation and the sample contained 31 experts.", "status": "supported-with-limit" },
    { "id": "C3", "claim": "Thermal perception varies by body site and is not a linear reading of skin temperature.", "support": [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "Experimental illusions and thresholds do not explain spontaneous symptoms in an individual patient.", "status": "supported" },
    { "id": "C4", "claim": "Objective–subjective discordance can depend on event alignment and measurement context.", "support": [11, 12], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "Menopausal hot-flush measurement is an analogy, not direct evidence for back heat or hand chill.", "status": "supported-by-analogy" },
    { "id": "C5", "claim": "Dynamic provocation and recovery may carry information missed by resting temperature, but thermal measures are neither universally sensitive nor disease-specific.", "support": [13, 14, 23], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "Protocols and target populations differ; no universal cut-off is justified.", "status": "supported-with-heterogeneity" },
    { "id": "C6", "claim": "The direction of a thermal word does not uniquely identify mechanism.", "support": [15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "These conditions are examples and not an exhaustive differential diagnosis.", "status": "supported" },
    { "id": "C7", "claim": "The Donguibogam preserves distinctions of region, depth, time, and extent within thermal observations.", "support": [24, 25, 26], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "Edition comparison and source-lineage verification beyond the public KIOM edition remain incomplete; no modern mechanistic equivalence is claimed.", "status": "textually-supported-preliminary" },
    { "id": "C8", "claim": "A spatiotemporal local thermal field may add information beyond global cold–heat scores.", "support": [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 13], "counterevidenceOrLimit": "This is the paper's conjecture, not an established result. It fails if repeatability or incremental clinical value is absent.", "status": "testable-hypothesis" }
  ]
}