How we work
Methodology
Our labels, source hierarchy, verification process, and freshness policy — so you can judge the judgment.
Regulatory status
We never collapse regulatory categories into a vague “available.” Every treatment carries exactly one of these statuses:
- FDA-approvedApproved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for one or more specific uses, with a defined label.
- Approved (other use)FDA-approved for a different indication than the one discussed here. Use for the indication described may be off-label.
- InvestigationalUnder study in clinical research and not approved by the FDA for general use. May be available only through trials.
- Compounded (not FDA-approved)Prepared by a compounding pharmacy for an individual patient. Compounded drugs are NOT FDA-approved and are not reviewed by the FDA for safety, effectiveness, or quality before marketing.
- Not FDA-approvedNot approved by the FDA for human use for this purpose. May be sold only as a research chemical or marketed without approval.
- Status unclearWe could not verify a clear, current U.S. regulatory status from authoritative sources. Treat with added caution.
Compounded and unapproved products are not FDA-reviewed for safety, effectiveness, or quality. We state this every time it applies.
Evidence levels
Evidence level describes how much credible human evidence supports a treatment — separately from its regulatory status.
- EstablishedSupported by multiple well-conducted randomized trials and/or systematic reviews with consistent results.
- ModerateSupported by some randomized or large observational studies, but with meaningful gaps or mixed findings.
- LimitedSupported mainly by small studies, early-phase trials, or indirect evidence. Conclusions are tentative.
- Preclinical onlyEvidence comes from laboratory or animal studies. Effects in humans are unproven.
- InsufficientThere is not enough credible human evidence to draw a conclusion for the use described.
- Not yet assessedWe have not yet completed an evidence assessment for this record.
Source hierarchy
We prefer sources in this order:
- 1.Government agency
- 2.Trial registry
- 3.Systematic review
- 3.Clinical study
- 4.Professional organization
- 5.Provider official page — supports operational facts only, not independent evidence of safety, efficacy, or superiority.
- 6.Reputable secondary source — supports operational facts only, not independent evidence of safety, efficacy, or superiority.
Provider websites may support provider-specific facts such as advertised pricing, coverage, and terms. They are not independent evidence of safety, efficacy, quality, or superiority. We do not publish provider prices or availability from memory — every figure is dated and sourced.
Provider verification & freshness
Provider records carry a last-verified date and a data-confidence rating. When a record is older than our 180-day freshness window, we show a visible stale-data warning prompting you to reconfirm current terms on the provider's official site. If we cannot verify a fact from an authoritative source, we leave the record as a draft and do not publish it.
Comparisons
We compare on consistent, sourced dimensions. We do not declare that one treatment is medically “best,” and we do not create awards or rankings without a published scoring method. Comparisons surface commonalities, material differences, and decision considerations so you can weigh them yourself.
Commercial independence
Commercial relationships never change our assessments or the order in which content appears. Any compensated link is labeled, and the site is fully functional with monetization disabled. See our advertising policy and affiliate disclosure.
What still needs review
This is an early publication. Medical content has been compiled and source-checked by our editorial process but has not yet been reviewed by an independent licensed clinician; that review is a pre-launch gate. We welcome corrections at corrections@peptidesclarified.com.