Review Guidelines – How We Fact Check and Review

Last Updated: August 17, 2025

Our Review Philosophy

At SupplementCrew, we are committed to providing accurate, evidence-based supplement reviews that help consumers make informed decisions. Our review process combines scientific research, expert analysis, and rigorous fact-checking to deliver trustworthy information.

Our Review Team

Our reviews are conducted by qualified health and nutrition professionals:

Dr. Sarah Clayton, PhD in Nutritional Science

- 15+ years of research experience in dietary supplements

- Former clinical researcher at major universities

- Specialized expertise in metabolic health and weight management supplements

Dr. Michael Torres, PharmD

- Licensed pharmacist with 12+ years experience

- Expert in supplement-drug interactions and safety profiles

- Specialized knowledge in herbal medicines and natural compounds

Our 4-Criteria Review System

Every supplement we review is evaluated using our comprehensive 4-criteria system:

1. Effectiveness (25 points)

- Scientific Evidence: We analyze peer-reviewed studies supporting key ingredients

- Clinical Data: Review of human trials and research outcomes

- Mechanism of Action: Understanding how ingredients work in the body

- Dosage Analysis: Evaluation of ingredient dosages vs. research-proven amounts

2. Safety (25 points)

- Ingredient Safety: Assessment of individual ingredient safety profiles

- Interaction Warnings: Potential conflicts with medications or conditions

- Side Effect Profile: Documentation of reported adverse effects

- Manufacturing Standards: Evaluation of production quality and certifications

3. Value (25 points)

- Cost Analysis: Price comparison with similar products

- Ingredient Quality: Assessment of ingredient forms and bioavailability

- Serving Economics: Cost per effective dose calculation

- Money-Back Guarantee: Evaluation of manufacturer guarantees

4. Customer Satisfaction (25 points)

- User Reviews: Analysis of verified customer feedback across platforms

- Complaint Patterns: Identification of recurring issues

- Success Stories: Documentation of positive outcomes

- Return Rates: Manufacturer and retailer return data when available

Research and Fact-Checking Process

Primary Research Sources

1. PubMed Database: We prioritize peer-reviewed studies from established medical journals

2. Cochrane Reviews: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses for comprehensive evidence

3. Government Health Agencies: FDA, NIH, and international regulatory body guidelines

4. University Research: Studies from accredited academic institutions

5. Clinical Trial Registries: Ongoing and completed clinical trial data

Evidence Hierarchy

We rank evidence quality in the following order:

1. Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: Highest quality evidence

2. Randomized Controlled Trials: Gold standard for supplement efficacy

3. Observational Studies: Valuable for safety and real-world outcomes

4. Case Studies: Limited but useful for rare effects or interactions

5. Manufacturer Studies: Considered but weighted appropriately for potential bias

Fact-Checking Standards

#### Information Verification

- Multiple Source Confirmation: Key claims verified through at least 2 independent sources

- Date Verification: Ensuring information currency and relevance

- Expert Consultation: Complex findings reviewed by subject matter experts

- Conflict of Interest Screening: Evaluation of study funding and researcher affiliations

#### Data Analysis

- Statistical Significance: Proper interpretation of p-values and confidence intervals

- Effect Size Assessment: Evaluation of practical significance beyond statistical significance

- Study Quality Assessment: Analysis of methodology, sample size, and study design

- Bias Detection: Identification of selection, publication, and reporting biases

Product Testing and Analysis

Ingredient Analysis

- Label Verification: Confirmation of stated ingredients and amounts

- Bioavailability Assessment: Evaluation of ingredient forms and absorption

- Purity Standards: Assessment of third-party testing and certifications

- Proprietary Blend Analysis: Evaluation of undisclosed ingredient amounts

Manufacturing Evaluation

- GMP Certification: Good Manufacturing Practice compliance verification

- Third-Party Testing: Independent laboratory testing for purity and potency

- Facility Inspection: FDA registration and inspection status

- Quality Assurance: Company quality control processes and standards

Review Update Process

Regular Review Cycles

- Quarterly Updates: Major reviews updated every 3 months

- Breaking News: Immediate updates for safety alerts or significant new research

- Annual Comprehensive Reviews: Complete re-evaluation of all criteria annually

- Manufacturer Changes: Updates when formulations or ownership changes

Correction Policy

- Error Reporting: Clear process for readers to report potential inaccuracies

- Correction Timeline: Verified errors corrected within 48 hours

- Update Notifications: Clear marking of correction dates and changes made

- Transparency: Full disclosure of significant review modifications

Ethical Standards

Editorial Independence

- No Manufacturer Influence: Review scores never influenced by business relationships

- Transparent Affiliations: Clear disclosure of any financial relationships

- Unbiased Methodology: Consistent application of review criteria across all products

- Editorial Oversight: Independent review of all content before publication

Disclosure Requirements

- Affiliate Relationships: Clear identification of commission-earning links

- Sample Products: Disclosure when products provided for review purposes

- Consultant Relationships: Notification of any advisory relationships

- Financial Interests: Declaration of any financial stake in reviewed companies

Quality Assurance

Internal Review Process

1. Primary Review: Initial evaluation by subject matter expert

2. Fact-Check Review: Independent verification of all factual claims

3. Editorial Review: Style, clarity, and completeness evaluation

4. Final Approval: Senior editor approval before publication

External Validation

- Peer Review: Selected reviews evaluated by external experts

- Reader Feedback: Community input incorporated into review updates

- Professional Consultation: Complex cases reviewed with medical professionals

- Accuracy Monitoring: Ongoing assessment of prediction accuracy

Limitations and Transparency

What We Cannot Do

- Individual Medical Advice: We do not provide personalized health recommendations

- Diagnosis or Treatment: Our reviews are educational, not diagnostic tools

- Real-Time Updates: Some information may lag behind rapid industry changes

- Complete Testing: We cannot test every product in independent laboratories

What We Commit To

- Evidence-Based Analysis: All recommendations grounded in scientific evidence

- Transparent Methodology: Clear explanation of our review process

- Regular Updates: Commitment to keeping information current and accurate

- Error Correction: Prompt correction of identified mistakes or outdated information

Contact Our Review Team

Questions about our review methodology or specific review criteria can be directed to our editorial team through our contact page. We welcome feedback that helps us improve our review process and accuracy.

---

Our review guidelines ensure that every supplement evaluation meets the highest standards of scientific rigor and editorial integrity.