How we grade the evidence
Every benefit on a Pilora ingredient page carries a letter grade. Here's exactly what those grades mean, where the underlying data comes from, and what we're still building.
The grading scale
Strong
Multiple large randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, or NIH Office of Dietary Supplements consensus support the use.
Moderate
One or two RCTs, or strong mechanistic plus consistent observational evidence. Promising but not yet definitive.
Mixed / preliminary
Small studies, mixed results, or evidence limited to animal/cell models. Suggestive, not conclusive.
Weak / traditional
Mostly traditional use, anecdote, or contradictory data. Included for completeness, not endorsement.
Grades are assigned conservatively and are AI-assisted assessments cross-checked against the sources below — not a substitute for your clinician's judgment. When the evidence is thin, we say so rather than rounding up.
Where the data comes from
NIH Office of Dietary Supplements (ODS)
Public-domain factsheets — the backbone of our vitamin & mineral pages.
DSLD (Dietary Supplement Label Database)
Real US-market label data → the median dose and common-range widgets on each page.
Wikidata · ChEBI · PubChem
Verified chemical identifiers so each ingredient links to authoritative reference entries.
PubMed
Primary research literature behind the benefit grades.
What this is — and isn't
Pilora is an educational reference and tracking tool, not a medical device. Letter grades describe the state of the published evidencefor a given use — not a recommendation that you take anything. Dosing figures reflect what's on the US market, not a prescription. Always talk to your doctor or pharmacist before changing a supplement or medication routine.
A fuller methodology — worked grading examples and our review process — is in progress. Questions? hello@pilora.app