Editorial policy

Where claims come from

Every graded benefit and risk claim on this site is drawn from peer-reviewed literature, randomised controlled trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies or, where a primary study isn't available, from mechanistic or traditional-use sources that are clearly labelled as such. We don't base claims on marketing material, press releases, or manufacturer websites.

Evidence grades

Every benefit and risk claim carries a letter grade for the strength of the evidence behind it:

Grade A· Strong evidence

Multiple randomised controlled trials, or a meta-analysis of RCTs, support the claim. Example: creatine's effect on high-intensity exercise performance, backed by dozens of RCTs and several meta-analyses.

Grade B· Limited evidence

At least one randomised controlled trial supports the claim, but the evidence is limited in size, replication, or consistency. Example: a single small RCT suggesting a benefit that hasn't yet been replicated in a larger trial.

Grade C· Preliminary evidence

Observational studies, mechanistic reasoning, or animal research support the claim, but it hasn't been confirmed in human RCTs. Example: an in-vitro or animal study showing a plausible mechanism that hasn't been tested in people.

Grade D· Traditional/anecdotal

The claim rests on traditional use or anecdotal reports, with no controlled human research behind it. Example: a use documented in traditional herbal medicine with no clinical trials to date.

Form grades

Where a supplement comes in several forms — magnesium citrate against oxide, folic acid against methylfolate — each form carries its own grade on the monograph. The letters look the same and the scale is not: a claim grade rates the evidence for an effect, a form grade rates the evidence for choosing that form.

That distinction matters most where it is counterintuitive. A form can be thoroughly studied and still graded low, because the grade reflects what the studies found rather than how many there are. Magnesium oxide is the best studied of the three common magnesium forms and is graded D, because the randomised comparisons consistently find it the least absorbed.

Grade A· Strong evidence for this form

Clinical outcome trials used this form, or head-to-head trials favour it. Example: folic acid, the form used in both randomised neural tube defect prevention trials.

Grade B· Limited evidence for this form

Trials used this form, or comparisons favour it, but on absorption surrogates rather than clinical outcomes. Example: magnesium citrate, above oxide in three randomised comparisons of absorption, none of them measuring a clinical result.

Grade C· Weak or mixed evidence

The evidence is thin, mixed, or missing the comparison that would settle it. Example: methylcobalamin, which no published head-to-head compares with cyanocobalamin for correcting deficiency.

Grade D· Evidence favours other forms

The evidence points to a different form, either because comparisons went against this one or because nothing supports choosing it. Example: magnesium oxide, less absorbed than citrate in every randomised head-to-head we can find.

Form grades never take price or stock into account. Which forms we can price is a fact about our catalogue, and letting it influence a clinical judgement would be the shop answering a clinical question.

Citation policy

Every graded benefit and risk claim cites a specific, verifiable source: a PMID (PubMed identifier) or a DOI, so you can look up the original study yourself rather than take our word for it. That is enforced in the schema, not just intended: a claim without a citation fails the build. What is not individually cited, and we would rather say so plainly: dosage ranges, timing and food guidance, the notes on each form, and the introductory overview on each monograph. Those are editorial summaries of standard practice, and while they are written from the same literature they are not each pinned to a specific source the way a graded claim is. Where a dose sits close to a documented risk threshold we say so at the dose, not only in the risks section. An automated script checks every citation against PubMed and Crossref to confirm it resolves to a real, matching record before publication.

How we treat risks

Risks and interactions are held to the same evidentiary standard as benefits: they're graded, cited, and described honestly. We don't downplay a documented risk to make a supplement look more appealing, and we don't inflate a theoretical risk beyond what the evidence supports.

Corrections

When we get something wrong (a misgraded claim, a broken citation, an outdated interaction) we fix it promptly. All site content lives in version control, so every change to a monograph is tracked and auditable; nothing is quietly edited without a record.

If you spot something wrong, tell us at content@welldosed.co.za. Point us at the page and what looks wrong, and a citation if you have one — it is the fastest way for us to check the source and fix it.

AI disclosure

Draft content on this site is AI-assisted: an AI model helps assemble the first draft of a monograph from the underlying sources. Every draft is human-reviewed for accuracy against the cited sources before it is published.