Ordering from outside the Americas?Switch to the EU store
We don't ship to your country yet. We ship across Europe and the Americas. You can keep browsing.
Account

Peptency Academy · About

How the Peptency Academy sources, labels and corrects evidence

The Peptency Academy sourcing policy is the written rule set that decides which sources a page may cite, how each study is labelled by design, how each sentence is checked against its source, and how errors are corrected. Source sentencePolicy scope, sections 1 to 10 of this page1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 It is modelled on Wikipedia's guideline for medical sources (MEDRS), adapted for molecules that often have no review literature. Source sentenceSection 'Use up-to-date evidence': 'These instructions are appropriate for actively researched areas with many primary sources and several reviews, and may need to be relaxed in areas where little progress is being made or where few reviews are published.'2 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 20261 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

Version 1Edited 13 sources

Known, not known, contested

Known

  • MEDRS names systematic reviews, literature reviews, textbooks and expert guidelines as the ideal sources for biomedical content. Source sentenceNutshell: 'Ideal sources for biomedical material include systematic and literature reviews in reliable, third-party, published secondary sources (such as reputable medical journals), recognised, standard medical textbooks, or medical guidelines and position statements from reputable national or international expert bodies.'2 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026
  • MEDRS cautions against using in vitro or animal model findings as evidence about human beings. Source sentenceSection 'Avoid over-emphasizing single studies, particularly in vitro or animal studies': 'in vitro and animal-model findings do not translate consistently into clinical effects in human beings. Where in vitro and animal-model data are cited on Wikipedia, it should be clear to the reader that the data are pre-clinical'2 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026
  • PubMed links each retracted article to its retraction notice and tags it with the publication type Retracted Publication. Source sentence'The Publication Type Retracted Publication [PT] is assigned to the retracted article.'3 NLM, Errata, Retractions, and Other Linked Citations in PubMed
  • The ICMJE asks journal editors to require that a clinical trial was registered in a public registry at or before the time of first patient consent for enrolment, as a condition of considering it for publication. Source sentence'the ICMJE recommends that all medical journal editors require registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry at or before the time of first patient consent for enrollment as a condition of consideration for publication.'4 ICMJE, Clinical Trial Registration

Not known

  • For several catalog compounds there is little review literature to lean on: a PubMed search on 13 Oct 2026 found 220 records naming BPC-157, one of them in the systematic review subset and none indexed as a randomised controlled trial. Source sentenceesearch counts: 220; systematic[sb] 1 (PMID 40756949); randomized controlled trial[pt] 05 PubMed search for BPC-157, 13 October 2026
  • A PubMed search on 13 Oct 2026 found 115 records naming epitalon and none in the systematic review subset. Source sentenceesearch counts: 115; systematic[sb] 06 PubMed search for epitalon reviews, 13 October 2026

Contested

  • There is no single agreed list of predatory journals: a 2020 Delphi study of experts reached consensus on 18 of 33 candidate items for a definition. Source sentence'We reached consensus on 18 items out of a total of 33 to be included in a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers.'7 BMJ Open 2020
  • Retraction databases differ in coverage: in September 2023 Crossref held about 14,000 retractions and the Retraction Watch database about 43,000, with some overlap. Source sentenceSupporting details: 'Crossref retractions number 14k, and the Retraction Watch database currently numbers 43k. There is some overlap, making a total of around 50k retractions.'8 Crossref, News: Crossref and Retraction Watch, 12 Sep 20239 Crossref, 12 Sep 2023
We prefer reviews, then primary studies labelled with their model, then trial registry and regulator records, with PubChem for chemistry; press, vendor pages and forums are not used as evidence. Source sentencePolicy, source order1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 12 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026 MEDRS advises against basing biomedical content on primary sources, because any given primary source can be contradicted by another. Source sentenceSection 'Avoid primary sources': 'Primary sources should NOT normally be used as a basis for biomedical content. This is because primary biomedical literature is exploratory and often not reliable (any given primary source may be contradicted by another).'2 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026 Where a molecule has no review, we show its primary studies one by one with their design and do not generalise from them. Source sentencePolicy, source order; MEDRS allows relaxing the review rule where few reviews are published1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 12 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026

Source order

  1. Reviews in indexed journals, systematic reviews first: used for context and never counted in the evidence map. Source sentencePolicy, source order and evidence map rules1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 12 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026
  2. Primary studies, each labelled with its model and molecule, and counted in the evidence map. Source sentencePolicy, source order1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
  3. Trial registry records: design, status and whether the primary endpoint was met, never effect sizes. Source sentencePolicy, trial wording rule1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
  4. Regulator pages, each status line with the date we read the page. Source sentencePolicy, status lines1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
  5. PubChem and the Peptency catalog record, for chemistry and identifiers. Source sentencePolicy, chemistry1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

What we do not use

  • Press releases, news articles, vendor pages, forums and social media are not used as evidence; MEDRS asks editors to wait for secondary sources rather than rely on press releases or newspaper articles. Source sentenceSection 'Respect secondary sources': 'Wait for reliable secondary sources (not press releases or newspaper articles based on such sources).'1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 12 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026
  • We avoid journals with a reputation for predatory publishing and read a journal that is not indexed in MEDLINE as a warning sign, as MEDRS does. Source sentenceSection 'Predatory journals': 'A journal article is probably not reliable for biomedical claims if its publisher has a reputation for exhibiting predatory behavior ... Other indications that a journal article may not be reliable are its publication in a journal that is not indexed in the bibliographic database MEDLINE'2 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026
  • Preprints carry a preprint badge, because medRxiv describes them as preliminary reports that have not been certified by peer review. Source sentence'Preprints are preliminary reports of work that have not been certified by peer review.'10 medRxiv, About medRxiv
Not on its own: MEDRS cautions against using in vitro or animal model findings as evidence about human beings, and asks that such data be marked as pre clinical. Source sentenceSection 'Avoid over-emphasizing single studies, particularly in vitro or animal studies': 'in vitro and animal-model findings do not translate consistently into clinical effects in human beings. Where in vitro and animal-model data are cited on Wikipedia, it should be clear to the reader that the data are pre-clinical'2 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026 A 2007 systematic review compared animal experiments with clinical trials of the same six interventions to examine whether the two agreed. Source sentenceAbstract, objective and results: 'To examine concordance between treatment effects in animal experiments and clinical trials'; conclusions: 'Discordance between animal and human studies'11 BMJ 2007 Every study in the Academy therefore carries its model (cells, rodent, other animal, human uncontrolled, human randomised), and no page states or implies that a cell or animal finding holds in people. Source sentencePolicy, model labels1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
The level names the most rigorous study design that exists for a molecule, not how well it works. Source sentencePolicy, evidence levels1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 The main display is the evidence map: a grid of model by measurement type, where each cell counts exact match studies and an empty cell reads 'no published study found as of' a date. Source sentencePolicy, evidence map1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

Evidence levels

none
No published primary data found. Source sentencePolicy, level table1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
L0
Chemistry or analytical work only. Source sentencePolicy, level table1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
L1
In vitro or ex vivo: cells, tissue or isolated molecules. Source sentencePolicy, level table1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
L2
Animal studies. Source sentencePolicy, level table1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
L3
Human, uncontrolled: pilot study, case series or chart review. Source sentencePolicy, level table1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
L4
Human, randomised controlled trial. Source sentencePolicy, level table1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

Evidence map columns

Chemistry, analytical
Identity, sequence, mass and purity methods. Source sentencePolicy, map columns1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Pharmacokinetics
Where the molecule goes in the body and how long it stays. Source sentencePolicy, map columns1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Receptor, signalling
Which receptor or pathway the molecule binds or acts on. Source sentencePolicy, map columns1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Tissue histology
Tissue examined under a microscope. Source sentencePolicy, map columns1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Biomarkers
Measured blood or tissue markers. Source sentencePolicy, map columns1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Clinical endpoint
A predefined clinical outcome measured in a trial. Source sentencePolicy, map columns1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

Evidence map rules

A grade of effect is an outcome claim, and Academy pages describe research materials and the studies about them, not clinical use. Source sentencePolicy, design not effect1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 MEDRS asks that the level of support for a hypothesis be evident to the reader; a design level and an evidence map make it evident without rating an effect. Source sentenceSection 'Avoid over-emphasizing single studies': 'The level of support for a hypothesis should be evident to a reader.'2 Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 20261 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 We show what kind of study exists and what it measured, and state trial results only as design, status and whether the primary endpoint was met, not met, mixed or not reported. Source sentencePolicy, trial wording rule1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Every sentence on an Academy page is a claim with a source and the sentence or section in that source that holds it. Source sentencePolicy, claims1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 Before a page is published, each PMID is read back from PubMed and its citation details are taken from that record, not typed. Source sentence'Before publication every PMID was read back from PubMed, and title, authors, journal, year, volume, pages and DOI were taken from that record, not typed.'12 Peptency research library, method page Each claim then carries one of four states. Source sentencePolicy, verification states1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

Verification states

Verified
A plain sentence: the primary source was read and holds it. Source sentencePolicy, states1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Secondary
The sentence plus 'reported by' and the source: no primary source was found; never used on the Academy's first 30 planned pages or in status cells. Source sentencePolicy, states1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Disputed
'Sources disagree on this point as of' a date: the sources conflict and both are kept with dates. Source sentencePolicy, states1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Open
Nothing is shown: the claim is not yet checked, and an open claim blocks publishing. Source sentencePolicy, states1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
A 2017 Cochrane methodology review of 75 papers examined whether manufacturer sponsorship of drug and device studies is associated with the results and conclusions those studies report. Source sentenceObjectives: 'To investigate whether industry sponsored drug and device studies have more favorable outcomes and differ in risk of bias, compared with studies having other sources of sponsorship.' Main results: 'in total the review contains 75 included papers.'13 Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017 Each study row therefore lists its funding source, author affiliations, corresponding author country and the conflict of interest statement as published, and the 'who produced this evidence' panel groups a molecule's studies by producer. Source sentencePolicy, conflicts of interest1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
PubMed links articles to their retraction notices, errata and expressions of concern. Source sentence'NLM creates links in PubMed between citations for original articles and citations for retraction and erratum notices, expressions of concern'3 NLM, Errata, Retractions, and Other Linked Citations in PubMed Crossref has made the Retraction Watch database a public resource since 12 September 2023. Source sentence'12th September 2023 ... announced today that the Retraction Watch database has been acquired by Crossref and made a public resource.'8 Crossref, News: Crossref and Retraction Watch, 12 Sep 20239 Crossref, 12 Sep 2023 We check every cited PMID and DOI against both. Source sentencePolicy, integrity checks1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 A retracted paper is never used to support a claim, and a correction notice is shown beside the paper it corrects. Source sentence'Retracted records are refused. A correction notice, where PubMed lists one, is shown beside the paper.'12 Peptency research library, method page Retractions, corrections, expressions of concern and published comment exchanges are listed on the page that cites the paper. Source sentencePolicy, integrity notes1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Each block has its own re-check window, and a block past its window opens a re-check task. Source sentencePolicy, freshness windows1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 Every page shows evidence current through, last edited, version and sources count; a published change raises the version. Source sentencePolicy, trust block1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 A change to an evidence map cell, a status cell or a trial's met or not met state is marked in the changelog as a change of conclusions. Source sentencePolicy, changelog1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

Re-check windows

Trials
7 days. Source sentencePolicy, freshness windows1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Regulator records
30 days, also for status cells and safety signals. Source sentencePolicy, freshness windows1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Studies and text
90 days, also for evidence maps. Source sentencePolicy, freshness windows1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Chemistry
180 days. Source sentencePolicy, freshness windows1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Email support@peptency.com with the page address, the sentence, and the source that says otherwise (PMID, DOI, registry or regulator link); paper suggestions use the same address. Source sentencePolicy, corrections1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

What happens to a report

  1. We acknowledge the report within 2 business days. Source sentencePolicy, corrections service level1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
  2. Within 14 days we correct the page or reply with the source that holds the sentence. Source sentencePolicy, corrections service level1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
  3. A correction raises the page version and is logged in the changelog. Source sentencePolicy, corrections1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
  4. We name the person who reported it only with their consent. Source sentencePolicy, corrections1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1
Each page passes seven checks before publishing: overview, best single answer, legal wording, sources, search and AI readability, follow up ideas, and layout on phone and desktop. Source sentencePolicy, review1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 Legal wording and sources are hard gates: one finding stops the page. Source sentencePolicy, review1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 Until a named human reviewer signs, pages read 'Reviewed by the Peptency editorial process'; we do not invent credentials. Source sentencePolicy, review1 Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1

Sources

  1. 1Peptency Academy sourcing policy, version 1 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  2. 2Wikipedia, Identifying reliable sources (medicine), revision of 31 Aug 2026 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  3. 3NLM, Errata, Retractions, and Other Linked Citations in PubMed accessed 13 Oct 2026
  4. 4ICMJE, Clinical Trial Registration accessed 13 Oct 2026
  5. 5PubMed search for BPC-157, 13 October 2026 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  6. 6PubMed search for epitalon reviews, 13 October 2026 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  7. 7BMJ Open 2020 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  8. 8Crossref, News: Crossref and Retraction Watch, 12 Sep 2023 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  9. 9Crossref, 12 Sep 2023 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  10. 10medRxiv, About medRxiv accessed 13 Oct 2026
  11. 11BMJ 2007 accessed 13 Oct 2026
  12. 12Peptency research library, method page accessed 13 Oct 2026
  13. 13Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017 accessed 13 Oct 2026

About this page

Research-use information. This library summarises published literature and regulator records. It is not guidance for use, not medical advice, and not a statement that any material is suitable for use in people or animals.

Reviewed by the Peptency editorial process. Version 1, last edited 13 October 2026, 13 sources.

Cite this page: Peptency Academy. How the Peptency Academy sources, labels and corrects evidence. Version 1./us/academy/about/how-we-source/