Our four core principles
1. Verified scientific sources
Every claim we make is backed by specific peer-reviewed research, FDA documentation, or guidelines from major medical societies. PMIDs and DOIs are listed at the end of each article so anyone can verify our sources directly.
2. Affiliate disclosure up front
If we have an affiliate relationship with a product we discuss, we disclose it at the top of the article — not buried in the footer. Disclosure does not influence what we write. Our complete list of affiliate relationships is published on our affiliate disclosure page.
3. Honest about what doesn't work
We name products that lack evidence as clearly as we name those that have it. When a provider we are affiliated with has documented operational issues — shipping delays, dosing discrepancies, billing complaints — those issues remain in the article. The affiliate relationship does not soften our description of problems.
4. Not medical advice
We share information based on what we read. We are not your doctor. Any decision about a specific health product is one to make with a licensed clinician who knows your history.
Conflict of interest
This site is funded primarily through affiliate commissions from companies whose products we discuss. We acknowledge that this creates a structural conflict of interest, and we manage it through three practices:
- Disclosure. Every affiliate relationship is disclosed up front in each article and listed in full on our affiliate disclosure page.
- Independence. Decisions about what to cover, in what order, what to praise, and what to criticize are made by us — not by anyone with financial interest in the outcome.
- Symmetric treatment. Providers we are not affiliated with are evaluated on the same terms as those we are affiliated with. Providers we are affiliated with receive the same scrutiny as those we are not.
We do not accept payment for coverage. We do not accept payment for favorable rankings. We do not accept payment to remove or soften criticism. If a company offers any of these arrangements, we decline.
What we do not publish
- Sponsored content. Every word in every article is independent. There is no advertorial, no native advertising, no "branded content."
- Fabricated quotes or testimonials. We do not invent quotes from physicians, patients, or experts. When we cite an expert, the citation is real and verifiable.
- Claims we cannot verify. Where a provider makes a claim we cannot independently verify, we either omit the claim or attribute it explicitly to the provider with that uncertainty noted.
- Recommendations for individual readers. We do not tell any individual reader which product is right for them. That requires a clinical evaluation by a licensed provider.
Sourcing standards
For clinical claims, our preferred sources are, in order:
- Pivotal randomized controlled trials published in major peer-reviewed journals (NEJM, JAMA, The Lancet, Nature Medicine, etc.)
- FDA prescribing information and FDA-issued guidance documents
- Clinical practice guidelines from established medical societies (ADA, AHA, Endocrine Society, etc.)
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses indexed in PubMed
For provider information, we verify directly from the provider's own website on the date of publication, supplemented by public records (state pharmacy boards, business registrations, BBB).
Corrections policy
If we publish a factual error, we correct it. The procedure:
- Reader notifies us at hello@inreportreview.com, or we identify the error ourselves
- We verify the error against original sources
- We update the article with the correct information
- For substantive corrections (a changed conclusion, a misstated clinical fact, a wrong price by more than 20%), we add a visible correction note at the bottom of the article describing what was changed and when
- For minor corrections (typos, formatting), we update silently
Updates
The clinical evidence base evolves. New trials are published; FDA approvals change; provider pricing and policies shift. When material new evidence becomes available, we update the relevant article and refresh the "Last updated" date at the top.
We do not retroactively remove old conclusions to make ourselves look more right than we were. Where our prior view has been updated based on new evidence, the change is noted.
Complaints
If you believe we have violated any of these principles, write to hello@inreportreview.com with a clear description of the issue. We respond to all complaints we receive.