Editorial Policy

Science is uncertain. We say so.

• Confidence intervals: When available, we report the range of likely effect, not just point estimates.
• Uncertainty labels: Every claim shows whether uncertainty is low, moderate, or high based on study consistency.
• Conflicting evidence: When studies disagree, we show the conflict explicitly with explanations for why findings differ.
• "We don't know": Some questions lack good evidence. We say so rather than speculate.

Evidence evolves. So does our content.

• Review cadence: Claims are reviewed at least annually or when major new research publishes.
• Version tracking: Every claim shows its version number, last review date, and reason for the most recent update.
• Changelog: Material changes are logged publicly with before/after values.
• Alert system: Major evidence shifts trigger email alerts to newsletter subscribers.

Rankings positions cannot be purchased. Our rankings are determined solely by our scoring methodology. Companies cannot pay for inclusion, improved position, or favorable reviews.

We do earn affiliate commissions when readers purchase products through our links. This financial relationship does not influence our scores or recommendations. Products that don't offer affiliate programs are evaluated equally.

We make mistakes. When we do, we fix them transparently:

• Minor corrections (typos, broken links) are fixed silently.
• Material corrections (factual errors, misrepresented studies) are noted in the changelog with date and explanation.
• Retractions are rare but possible if fundamental errors undermine the entire claim. The claim remains visible with a prominent retraction notice.

To report an error, email corrections@researchtoreps.com.