Every article on OutliveHub receives a credibility score from 0 to 100, calculated from five equally weighted dimensions. This transparent framework helps you quickly assess how much weight to give each finding — no expertise required.
How We Score Research
A transparent framework for evaluating longevity research
The Five Dimensions
Each dimension is scored from 0 to 20. The overall score is the sum of all five.
Study Design
Rigor of the research methodology
— /20
Sample Size
Whether the study was sufficiently powered
— /20
Peer Review
Review status and journal reputation
— /20
Replication
Has this finding been independently reproduced?
— /20
Transparency
Funding disclosure and data availability
— /20
Overall
Sum of all five dimensions
— /100
What Each Dimension Measures
Study Design (0–20)
How rigorous is the methodology? Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews score highest. Observational studies, case reports, and animal models score lower. The best designs minimize bias and isolate causal relationships.
Sample Size (0–20)
Was the study sufficiently powered to detect its claimed effect? Large, well-powered human trials score highest. Mouse studies, small cohorts, and underpowered analyses score lower.
Peer Review (0–20)
Has the paper been peer-reviewed and published in a reputable journal? Publications in top-tier journals with rigorous review processes score highest. Preprints and papers from predatory journals score lowest.
Replication (0–20)
Has this finding been independently reproduced by other research groups? Well-replicated findings that hold across different populations and conditions score highest. Novel, unreplicated claims score lower — exciting does not mean reliable.
Transparency (0–20)
Are funding sources disclosed? Is the raw data publicly available? Pre-registered studies with open data, clear conflict-of-interest declarations, and reproducible methods score highest.
Credibility Levels
The overall score maps to one of four levels.
Verified
75 – 100
Strong evidence from well-designed, peer-reviewed, and independently replicated research.
Promising
50 – 74
Solid methodology but may lack replication, have a limited sample, or come from a single research group.
Preliminary
25 – 49
Early-stage research with significant limitations — animal models, small samples, preprints, or unverified claims.
Disputed
0 – 24
Serious methodological concerns, contradicted by stronger evidence, or flagged for integrity issues.
Red Flags
Articles may be flagged independently of their score for concerns such as undisclosed conflicts of interest, publication in a predatory journal, retracted citations, or undisclosed industry funding. Red flags appear as warnings on the article page.
Plain Language Verdict
Every scored article includes a plain-language summary that cuts through the hype. It tells you what the research actually shows — and, just as importantly, what it does not.