Our Methodology
Every compound page on CompoundGuide is built on a documented methodology designed to present research accurately and without bias.
Source Selection
We prioritize peer-reviewed publications indexed in PubMed, preprint servers (bioRxiv, medRxiv), and regulatory agency documents. Manufacturer-funded studies are included but flagged. Anecdotal reports are not cited as evidence.
Evidence Grading
Each compound receives a research status rating based on the volume and quality of available studies. Ratings range from Preclinical Only (animal or in vitro studies only) to Human Clinical Evidence (randomized controlled trials in humans). These ratings are updated as new research emerges.
Claims Language
We use hedged language throughout: "research suggests," "studies indicate," "may support." Direct therapeutic claims are never made. We distinguish between studied mechanisms and observed outcomes.
Regulatory Context
Each compound page includes regulatory status for key jurisdictions (US, EU, UK). This reflects the compound's legal classification at time of publication — not legal advice for any specific use.
Keeping Content Current
Research summaries are reviewed periodically as new studies are published. The publication date on each page reflects the most recent substantive update.
Corrections Policy
If you identify a factual error or a missing key study, please use the contact form. Verified corrections are applied promptly and noted in the page revision history.