How We Research, Write, and Review
Primary sources. Periodic review. Visible citations. No paid placements. Here is exactly how editorial content on StackCheck is produced.
Where Our Claims Come From
StackCheck prioritises primary evidence in the following order:
- Peer-reviewed studies indexed on PubMed - randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses are weighted most heavily. Individual case reports and in-vitro findings are flagged as such when used.
- Research monographs on Examine.com - used as a cross-reference for dose ranges, form selection, and effect-size estimates. Examine is independent, subscription-funded, and uses a structured grading system.
- Guidance from regulatory and clinical bodies - FDA, NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, NHS, Endocrine Society, and equivalent authorities for dose limits, safety notices, and consensus positions.
We explicitly avoid generic "health and wellness" content farms, marketing copy published by supplement brands, and AI-generated review sites as primary sources. Wikipedia may be used to locate source citations but is never itself cited.
The Process
- Question-first. Guides are written to answer a specific, searchable question ("Can I take vitamin D and magnesium together?") rather than to catalogue a supplement in general.
- Source-first drafting. Each key claim is tied to a source link at the point of writing, not attached retrospectively.
- Direction over doses. When the literature is noisy on exact numbers, we report direction and rough magnitudes (e.g. "approximately 32-50% increase with dietary fat") rather than false precision.
- Conservative framing on YMYL claims. For anything that touches dose, safety, or interaction with medication, we defer to clinician oversight and flag uncertainty rather than paper over it.
- Internal review. Every published guide is read at least once end-to-end by a second person on the editorial team before going live, specifically checking citations, dose ranges, and form recommendations.
How We Keep Pages Up to Date
Every editorial page carries a visible "Last reviewed" date in the top section. Our review policy:
- Minimum annual review of every published guide. If no changes are needed, the "Last reviewed" date still updates to record that the page was re-read.
- Event-driven review when a significant new study, meta-analysis, or regulatory update is published on a topic we cover. These are actioned within 30 days of noticing.
- Correction-driven review when a reader flags an error or broken citation. These are actioned as quickly as we can verify the claim - usually within a week.
When a page is materially changed, the change is reflected in the structured "dateModified" field and, for large revisions, a note is added at the top of the page.
What We Will and Will Not Accept
StackCheck does not accept:
- Paid placements in guides, rankings, or recommendations
- Gifted products reviewed as editorial
- Affiliate commissions on supplements mentioned
- Equity, stipends, or retainers from supplement brands, retailers, or manufacturers
We do accept: revenue from users who upgrade the StackCheck tool itself. That is the entire commercial relationship. If this ever changes - for example if we add disclosed affiliate links to a supplement retailer - the disclosure will appear on every affected page and at the top of this methodology document.
What StackCheck Does and Does Not Model
The StackCheck tool models common interactions at the level of absorption competition (shared transporters), cofactor relationships (nutrients that activate or deplete each other), and circadian timing (morning vs evening dosing windows). It does not model:
- Interactions with prescription medications
- Interactions specific to pregnancy, breastfeeding, kidney disease, or liver disease
- Dose-dependence beyond "typical supplemental dose" ranges
- Individual genetic variation in transporters or metabolic enzymes
For any of those, talk to a qualified clinician who can look at your full picture.
Corrections Are a First-Class Priority
We want to know about mistakes. Send corrections via the contact page or the feedback form, ideally with a link to the source that contradicts what is currently on the page.
We reply to editorial corrections directly and attribute the correction in a page footer when the correction is substantive, unless the reporter prefers not to be named.