Disclosure: WILGO may earn a commission from purchases made through product links on this site.
Home → Research Index → Research Methodology
WILGO RESEARCH INDEX

Research Methodology

The rules behind the index: primary sources first, study design made visible, endpoints described narrowly, and preclinical findings kept separate from human outcomes.

EXPLORE ↓RESEARCH INDEX →
METHODOLOGY

How WILGO classifies evidence.

The goal is not to generate a proprietary “evidence score.” It is to make study design and translation limits visible.

Human randomizedProspective human research using random allocation. We distinguish pharmacology endpoints from clinical efficacy endpoints.
Other humanObservational, uncontrolled, case-series, physiologic, pharmacokinetic or other human evidence that is not a randomized efficacy trial.
Animal / in vivoWhole-animal experiments. Useful for mechanism and hypothesis generation; not treated as proof of a human outcome.
In vitro / ex vivoCell, tissue, biochemical or isolated-organ work, including human tissue outside a living participant.
1

Primary sources first.

PubMed records, DOI/publisher pages, ClinicalTrials.gov, PubChem, NIH/FDA material and original papers are preferred over commercial summaries.

2

Endpoint discipline.

A biomarker change is described as a biomarker change. A pharmacokinetic result is not rewritten as a therapeutic benefit. A negative efficacy endpoint remains visible.

3

Identity discipline.

Closely related peptides, fragments, salts, complexes and commercial names are not automatically treated as interchangeable. TB-500 versus native thymosin β4 is the clearest example in the launch index.

4

Living index.

Pages show review dates. New evidence can change a classification, so the underlying paper—not the label—is the authority.

What WILGO does not do: no invented numerical evidence scores, no conversion of animal findings into human claims, and no assumption that a registered trial has produced a result merely because a registry record exists.