How we read the evidence

What counts as a source

Factual content on this site comes from peer-reviewed publications only: systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials indexed in PubMed. Every statement resolves to a PMID and, where one exists, a DOI.

• Included: systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, and human pharmacokinetic studies in peer-reviewed journals.
• Cited but labelled separately: regulatory documents such as EFSA opinions and EMA/HMPC monographs. These describe regulatory status, not clinical evidence, and are never used to support an efficacy statement.
• Excluded: trade press, conference abstracts without a full paper, preprints, in-vitro-only reports, animal-only reports where human data exists, and manufacturer white papers.

Claim Readiness ratings

Each ingredient entry carries one of three ratings. The rating describes how far the human evidence has travelled, not how promising the molecule looks.

• Strong — consistent meta-analytic evidence in humans, with effect direction stable across independent syntheses.
• Moderate — positive trial evidence that is limited, heterogeneous, small in total sample, or concentrated in industry-funded studies.
• Emerging — mechanistic data, pharmacokinetics, or early or conflicting clinical evidence. Not a basis for a claim.

A rating is never given without its strongest limitation stated in the same paragraph. If a large well-conducted trial is null, that null result appears next to the positive meta-analysis rather than below it.

What we record per study

• Study design, sample size and population
• Intervention, dose, form and duration
• Primary endpoint and effect size with confidence or credible interval
• Risk of bias as reported by the review authors
• Funding source and declared conflicts of interest
• Heterogeneity and applicability to the population you are formulating for

Independence

1Q Science Academy does not manufacture, distribute or broker ingredients, and does not accept payment from ingredient suppliers to feature a molecule. Client work through the Product Concept Lab is disclosed to the client and does not change what appears in the public library.

Corrections

Where a cited paper is later retracted, corrected or superseded, the entry is updated and the change noted. If you believe an entry misreads a paper, tell us — with the citation — and we will correct it or explain why we read it differently.

Scope limits

This site is written for industry professionals. It is educational content about the evidence base, not medical advice, not a treatment recommendation, and not an approved health claim in any jurisdiction. Nothing here should be reproduced on consumer-facing packaging without a regulatory review in the target market.