How we check claims

Every page in the Evidence Library starts with the same pipeline that runs inside the EvidenceLens app. A claim (or each factual claim extracted from a video) is rewritten into a neutral, language-independent research statement. That statement is matched against our index of peer-reviewed publications using semantic search, the closest papers are read, and a language model weighs how much of the evidence supports or contradicts the statement.

The output is a verdict, a confidence score from 0 to 100, the main reasons, what is still missing, and the list of papers that drove the decision. Nothing on a page is written by hand except the editor's review notes; everything else is the pipeline's own output, checked by a person before publication.

The research index is built from OpenAlex, an open catalogue of scholarly works. We keep peer-reviewed research articles and reviews that have an abstract, and exclude editorials, letters, errata, paratexts and other non-research work types. Older literature is included when it is still the best available evidence, but the index is weighted towards recent publications.

Pages link to papers by DOI so you can read the originals. We publish titles, authors, years and study types, never abstracts or full texts.

Automation ends at a draft. An editor reads each draft against the cited papers, checks that the wording is never stronger than the verdict, removes anything that reads as advice, and either approves the page or sends it back. A page appears on the website only when an editor approves it, so no verdict reaches the public without a person signing it off.

The review date is printed on every page. When the underlying pipeline improves, pages are regenerated and go through the same review again before the update is published.

A verdict describes the strength of published research for a specific statement. “Not confirmed” means the evidence does not back the statement as worded; it does not mean the person who said it lied, and it does not rule out future findings. “Not enough data” means exactly that: the question has not been studied well enough to say.

Checked-video pages judge claims, not creators. We quote at most one sentence per claim so you can find the moment in the original video, and we link to the original so you can watch it in context.

Nothing here is medical, legal or financial advice. Research findings describe populations and conditions that may not match yours. Talk to a professional about your own situation.

If a page misstates a paper, misquotes a video, or checks a claim that should not be here, write to support@evidence-lens.com with the page URL. We correct or remove pages after checking the sources again, and we note material corrections on the page.