Our Methodology
Transparency is at the heart of everything we do. Here is exactly how we create, review, and maintain our evidence-based content.
Content Creation Process
Topic Identification
We identify questions and topics based on common queries, user feedback, and emerging research areas.
Literature Review
We conduct comprehensive searches of scientific databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, etc.) for relevant research.
Evidence Synthesis
We analyze and synthesize findings from multiple sources, prioritizing the highest quality evidence available.
Peer Review
Content is reviewed by subject matter experts before publication to ensure accuracy and completeness.
Evidence Grading System
We use a hierarchical evidence grading system to help you understand the strength of evidence behind each claim. Higher-level evidence is generally more reliable and less prone to bias.
Systematic Review
High QualityComprehensive review of all relevant studies on a topic using rigorous methodology to minimize bias.
Examples: Cochrane Reviews, PRISMA-compliant systematic reviews
Meta-Analysis
High QualityStatistical analysis combining results from multiple studies to identify patterns and draw stronger conclusions.
Examples: Pooled analyses of randomized controlled trials
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)
High QualityExperimental study where participants are randomly assigned to intervention or control groups.
Examples: Double-blind, placebo-controlled trials
Cohort Study
Moderate QualityObservational study following groups over time to identify associations between exposures and outcomes.
Examples: Adventist Health Study, EPIC-Oxford
Expert Consensus
Moderate QualityStatements or guidelines developed by expert panels based on available evidence and clinical experience.
Examples: Position papers from Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
Expert Opinion
Limited QualityViews expressed by recognized experts, typically when higher-quality evidence is limited.
Examples: Expert commentary, editorials in peer-reviewed journals
Source Selection Criteria
What We Include
- +Peer-reviewed journal articles
- +Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
- +Official guidelines from recognized health organizations
- +Government reports and statistics
- +Reports from reputable scientific institutions
What We Exclude
- -Non-peer-reviewed articles
- -Blog posts and opinion pieces (as primary sources)
- -Industry-funded studies without disclosure
- -Predatory journal publications
- -Social media posts and anecdotal evidence
Source Verification Process
Every source in our database undergoes a verification process to ensure accuracy and reliability:
DOI/PMID Verification
We verify that Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) and PubMed IDs (PMIDs) are valid and link to the correct publication.
Citation Accuracy
We check that our citations accurately represent the findings of the source material without misrepresentation.
Currency Check
We prioritize recent research and flag when newer studies may have superseded older findings.
Review and Update Process
Regular Reviews
All content is scheduled for periodic review to ensure it remains current with the latest research. High-traffic and rapidly evolving topics are reviewed more frequently.
- - Core nutrition content: Annual review
- - Health claims: 6-month review cycle
- - Environmental data: Updated with new reports
Triggered Updates
We also update content when:
- - Major new studies are published
- - Official guidelines are updated
- - Users report potential inaccuracies
- - Our review process identifies issues
Limitations and Disclaimers
While we strive for accuracy, we acknowledge several important limitations:
- !Not medical advice: Our content is educational and should not replace professional medical consultation.
- !Science evolves: Research findings can change, and we may not always have the most recent data.
- !Individual variation: Nutritional needs vary by individual; general information may not apply to everyone.
- !Selection bias: Despite our best efforts, our source selection may inadvertently omit relevant research.
Questions About Our Methods?
We welcome feedback and questions about our methodology. Your input helps us improve our processes and content quality.