Evaluation archive
Browse our library of evaluated clinical trials. Each report applies the full Ten Major Considerations framework. Subscribe free to unlock the full archive.
3 of 10 evaluations shown
Subscribe free to unlock the full archive.
Our framework
Every evaluation Arbor publishes applies the same standardized framework drawn from Evidence-Based Medicine principles.
Each trial is assessed across ten methodological criteria. We assign a Strength or Limitation verdict to each, with a brief justification drawn directly from the trial's reported methods and results.
| Level | Evidence type |
|---|---|
| I | Properly designed RCT, or systematic review / meta-analysis of RCTs |
| II | Well-designed RCT with some weaknesses, or non-randomized controlled study |
| III | Non-randomized, non-controlled prospective study (e.g., cohort) |
| IV | Retrospective study (e.g., case-control) |
| V | Expert opinion, case series, or case report |
| Grade | Basis |
|---|---|
| A | Consistent, good-quality patient-oriented evidence (Level I) |
| B | Inconsistent or limited-quality evidence (Level II–III) |
| C | Consensus, usual practice, or case-series evidence (Level IV–V) |
Community
Have a trial you'd like us to evaluate? Submit it below and we'll consider it for an upcoming issue.