How Endova Health Evaluates Research
Endova Health reviews publicly available biomedical research to help readers understand what is known, what remains uncertain, and how strong the available evidence appears to be. We consider study design, human relevance, consistency, limitations, safety findings, and regulatory context while keeping research summaries educational and non-prescriptive.
Our Research Principles
Evidence Quality
We consider study design, sample size, controls, consistency, and important limitations when interpreting research findings.
Human Relevance
Human clinical evidence is distinguished from animal and laboratory research. Preclinical findings are not presented as established human outcomes.
Source Transparency
Research summaries identify and link to the underlying scientific and regulatory sources whenever possible so readers can examine the evidence directly.
No Treatment Recommendations
Endova summarizes research without recommending treatments, determining appropriate doses, or providing individualized medical advice.
Not All Evidence Is Equal
01 — Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
Syntheses of multiple studies that can provide a broader view of the available evidence, depending on the quality of the included research.
02 — Randomized Controlled Trials
Human studies designed to evaluate interventions while reducing important sources of bias.
03 — Other Human Clinical Research
Non-randomized trials and observational studies that can provide useful evidence but generally offer less certainty about causation.
04 — Case Reports & Case Series
Clinical observations that may identify potential effects or safety signals but cannot reliably establish effectiveness.
05 — Animal Research
Preclinical studies useful for investigating biological effects and generating hypotheses that require human validation.
06 — Laboratory / In-Vitro Research
Early-stage mechanistic research conducted in cells, tissues, or other laboratory models.
Position in this hierarchy alone does not determine evidence quality. Study design, execution, consistency, directness, precision, and other limitations also matter.
Collaborate on Our Research Standards
We invite the research community to suggest relevant papers, offer feedback, or ask specific questions regarding our evidence-based verification process. Your input helps us maintain the highest level of scientific integrity.