SigMedical.net | How We Review

The SigMedical Insights Team follows a consistent, documented verification process for every article published on this site. This page explains that process in full — including how products and platforms are selected, how evidence is evaluated, how affiliate relationships are managed, how errors are corrected, and how content is kept current.

Readers, researchers, and quality evaluators should find everything they need here to assess the credibility of work published on SigMedical.net.

Step 1: Topic Selection and Search Demand Verification

Every article begins with a documented consumer need. The SigMedical Insights Team identifies topics based on demonstrated search demand — the questions that health-conscious readers are actually asking — rather than editorial preference or affiliate commission availability.

Before any article is assigned, the team verifies that the topic represents a genuine consumer information gap: a question that current search results do not answer with sufficient accuracy, depth, or evidence transparency. Topics that exist only to promote affiliate products without serving a genuine reader need are not pursued.

Step 2: Source Identification and Verification

Before any content is written, the SigMedical Insights Team identifies and verifies the primary sources for the topic under review.

For supplement and ingredient content, this includes: the brand's official website and Supplement Facts panel; PubMed-indexed research on the relevant ingredients; FDA databases (adverse event reports, facility registrations, warning letters); third-party testing documentation where publicly available; and any published clinical data on finished-product formulations.

For health technology and device content, this includes: the manufacturer's official technical specifications; FDA 510(k) clearance records and device classification databases; published research on the underlying mechanism or technology; independent device testing data where available; and consumer-reported performance data from verifiable sources.

For telehealth platform content, this includes: direct review of the platform's website, pricing pages, and terms of service; verification of prescribing entity and pharmacy relationships; FDA and DEA regulatory status of medications offered; and publicly available clinical data on the treatments provided.

Sources are logged before writing begins. Only verified sources are cited. Claims that cannot be verified are explicitly identified as unverified or excluded from publication.

Step 3: Evidence Classification

The SigMedical Insights Team applies consistent evidence classification across all content. Readers deserve to know not just what the research found, but what kind of research it was and how confident they should be in it.

Evidence is classified as follows:

• Finished-product clinical trials: Studies conducted on the specific product under review, in human subjects, with disclosed methodology. This is the highest evidentiary standard and is distinguished clearly from ingredient-level research.
• Ingredient-level human trials: Studies conducted on an individual ingredient at a specific dose in human subjects. May or may not reflect the formulation, dosage, or delivery method of the reviewed product.
• Preclinical or animal-model research: Studies conducted in laboratory settings or non-human subjects. May indicate potential mechanisms but does not confirm human efficacy or safety.
• Manufacturer-disclosed data: Clinical or testing data published by the manufacturer without independent third-party verification. Identified as such in all content.
• Marketing claims without supporting data: Assertions made in marketing materials without citation to published research or third-party testing. Always identified explicitly and never represented as independent findings.

When evidence is preliminary, conflicting, limited to surrogate endpoints, or absent entirely, content states this directly. The SigMedical Insights Team does not fill evidence gaps with inference or speculation.

Step 4: Label vs. Marketing Verification (Supplements)

For supplement reviews, the SigMedical Insights Team compares the product's verified Supplement Facts panel against the brand's marketing ingredient claims. Content is written only to what appears on the verified Supplement Facts panel. Marketing claims that reference ingredients, dosages, or proprietary blend compositions not confirmed by the panel are flagged as unverifiable and excluded from the analysis or explicitly identified as marketing claims only.

Step 5: Regulatory and Compliance Context

Every article includes relevant regulatory context for the category being reviewed:

• Supplement articles include DSHEA compliance framing and the FDA evaluation statement.
• Device articles address FDA clearance or classification status, and accurately represent what that status does and does not indicate.
• Telehealth articles distinguish between FDA-approved medications, compounded medications, and OTC products, and identify the three-entity structure of telehealth services (platform, prescribing entity, dispensing pharmacy) where applicable.
• Articles covering compounded medications include the required compounding disclaimer as required by FTC guidance and the editorial standards of this site.

Step 6: Affiliate Relationship Disclosure

SigMedical.net participates in affiliate partnerships with certain product manufacturers and platform providers. Affiliate relationships are disclosed in the following locations:

• In-article disclosure: Every article containing paid links includes a disclosure statement within the article body, proximate to the first paid link. The disclosure uses “paid link” language consistent with FTC guidance under 16 CFR Part 255.
• This page: The editorial standards page explains how affiliate relationships are managed and that they do not influence analysis or conclusions.
• Site footer: Every page on SigMedical.net includes a footer disclosure identifying that some links are paid links.

Affiliate commission rates do not influence which products are reviewed, the conclusions of any analysis, or how products are characterized. The SigMedical Insights Team has published critical analysis of products with active affiliate relationships and favorable analysis of products with no affiliate relationship.

Step 7: Content Currency and Verification Dating

Health technology markets, supplement formulations, telehealth pricing, and regulatory status change frequently. Every article published on SigMedical.net includes a “Last Verified” date that reflects the actual date on which pricing, policies, and key facts were last confirmed — not merely the date the article was last edited.

Content refresh cadence:

• Product-focused reviews: re-verified every 6–12 months or when material changes are identified
• Telehealth platform reviews: pricing and policy terms re-verified quarterly
• Ingredient research pages: updated when meaningful new studies are published in indexed journals

Corrections Policy

The SigMedical Insights Team is committed to factual accuracy. When a factual error is identified — whether by the editorial team or a reader — the team investigates the claim, and if warranted, issues a correction within the affected article. Corrections are noted with a timestamp and a brief description of what was changed.

To report a potential factual error, use the Contact page and select “Editorial Correction” from the inquiry type dropdown. The editorial team will review all submitted corrections.

What This Site Does Not Do

The SigMedical Insights Team does not fabricate research, invent study citations, or reproduce marketing claims as independent research findings. The team does not assign star ratings or numeric scores to products without a disclosed, reproducible methodology. The team does not publish testimonials or customer outcome claims without verified, attributed sources. The team does not claim FDA approval, physician endorsement, or clinical validation for any product without a literal, verifiable source.