Methodology
How we score evidence — and what we refuse to do.
RUO Report is an editorial research publication. Our credibility rests on a transparent, consistent method and clearly disclosed limits.
Evidence levels
Every article and profile carries one evidence level, reflecting the strength of the literature discussed — not an endorsement, recommendation, or claim of effect.
Consistent, well-replicated human clinical evidence with low risk of bias.
Some human evidence, or strong and consistent animal/mechanistic data with limitations.
Sparse human data; findings rest largely on animal or in-vitro work.
Early signals only — small studies, single groups, or unreplicated results.
Too little credible evidence to characterize; treat with caution.
How reviews are scored
Reviews assess documentation, not marketing. Each is scored 0–100 across five dimensions; the overall score is their composite. A dash means a dimension was not assessed — we never invent a number.
- Transparency
- How openly the vendor documents identity, sourcing, and process.
- Documentation
- Availability and completeness of COAs and supporting paperwork.
- Research support
- Whether claims are tied to credible, verifiable literature.
- Testing visibility
- How visible and independent third-party testing appears to be.
- User clarity
- How clearly information is presented to a careful reader.
Standards & process
Citation standards
We cite only sources we can verify. We never fabricate DOIs, PubMed IDs, authors, journals, quotations, purity figures, or COAs. Unverified content is flagged for editorial review and excluded from indexing until checked.
Research-type classification
We distinguish human, animal, in-vitro, mechanistic, review, and documentation evidence, and say plainly which a claim rests on.
Update & corrections policy
Entries show a last-updated date. Substantive corrections are made promptly; significant changes are noted. Contact us to flag an error.
AI-assisted content policy
We use AI tools to assist drafting and structuring. All content is subject to human editorial oversight and source verification before it is treated as reviewed. Draft, unverified material is labeled and noindexed.
Conflict & commercial disclosure
Affiliate and sponsored relationships are disclosed on the pages where they apply. Commercial relationships do not dictate scores or conclusions.
Independence
We describe ourselves as editorially independent with disclosed commercial relationships — not “100% independent.”
What RUO Report does
- Summarize and contextualize research
- Assign transparent evidence levels
- Analyze documentation and testing visibility
- Disclose every commercial relationship
- Flag uncertainty and limitations
What RUO Report never does
- Provide dosing, protocols, or use instructions
- Give medical, veterinary, or treatment advice
- Claim a compound is safe or effective for people
- Fabricate citations, scores, COAs, or purity data
- Recommend unsupervised use of any compound
Limitations of our methodology
Evidence levels and scores are editorial judgments, not guarantees. The literature evolves, documentation can change, and absence of evidence is not evidence of safety or efficacy. Treat everything here as a starting point for further, qualified evaluation.