Research & Review Methodology

This page explains how our team researches, fact-checks and updates the product guides on this website. We built this process so readers can see exactly how a conclusion was reached, not just what the conclusion is.

In short: we review primary sources directly, separate marketing claims from independent evidence, avoid inventing facts we can't verify, and disclose commercial relationships clearly. If something can't be confirmed, we say so instead of guessing.

What We Review

Before publishing or updating a guide, our editorial process typically covers the following:

  1. Primary source review

    We start with the seller's or manufacturer's own page, reading the claims, specifications and positioning as written, rather than relying on secondhand summaries.

  2. Label, specification or documentation review

    Where a product has a label, spec sheet, terms document or similar official documentation, we check it directly and note anywhere it differs from what's promoted on the main sales or marketing page.

  3. Pricing and checkout review

    We review the current pricing, package options and checkout flow so cost information reflects what a visitor will actually see, not an outdated or assumed figure.

  4. Independent evidence search

    We look for independent, third-party information, such as published research, credible news coverage or independent user feedback, separate from the seller's own marketing material.

  5. Claim-versus-evidence separation

    We distinguish between what a brand claims and what independent evidence actually supports. A claim being present on a sales page does not mean we treat it as verified.

  6. Limitation notes

    Where we cannot verify something, whether that's a testimonial, a result, a policy detail or a specification, we say so directly on the page rather than filling the gap with an assumption.

How We Handle Brand Claims and Testimonials

Marketing claims and customer testimonials published on a brand's own page are treated as brand-published content, not independent proof. When we reference this kind of material, we label it clearly as brand-published and unverified, and we do not present it as evidence of typical results.

We do not fabricate customer experiences, test results, endorsements or reviews. If we have not personally tested a product, we say so rather than implying hands-on use that did not happen.

Sources We Prioritize

Source TypeHow We Use It
Manufacturer or seller's official pagePrimary reference for claims, pricing and positioning
Official labels, spec sheets or terms documentsVerification against marketing claims
Government or recognized authority sourcesGeneral factual and safety context, where relevant
Independent, third-party reviews or reportingCross-checking brand claims against outside evidence

We do not invent citations, studies, statistics or sources. If a claim cannot be traced to a verifiable source, we remove it or clearly mark it as unverified.

Commercial Relationships

Some guides on this website may include affiliate links, meaning we can earn a commission if a reader makes a purchase through them, at no extra cost to the reader. This relationship does not change how a product is described. A claim we can't verify stays labeled as unverified whether or not it affects a potential commission.

Corrections and Updates

Pricing, availability, formulas, policies and terms can change after a guide is published. We aim to review and update pages periodically, and we note a "last reviewed" date at the top of each guide rather than changing the date without an actual review taking place.

If you believe something on this site is inaccurate or out of date, we welcome the correction. Details on how to reach our editorial team are available on our contact page.

What This Process Does Not Do


This methodology page is intentionally general so it can describe our editorial approach across different guides and categories on this website.