Last updated: May 23, 2026.
shariqrefai.com publishes educational content about psychiatry, mental health, and human behavior. To keep that content honest, the editorial process leans on a structured evidence hierarchy rather than the loudest opinion or the most viral source.
The Evidence Hierarchy
When choosing what to cite, how strongly to frame a claim, and when to update an essay, sources are weighed roughly in this order:
- Meta-analyses: pooled quantitative analyses of multiple well-designed studies, when methodology is sound and heterogeneity is acceptable.
- Systematic reviews: structured, transparent reviews of the body of evidence on a focused clinical question.
- Practice guidelines: recommendations from recognized professional bodies (for example, the American Psychiatric Association, NICE, WHO, and similar) that integrate evidence with clinical judgment.
- Randomized controlled trials: well-designed, adequately powered RCTs, with attention to population, comparator, blinding, and outcome relevance.
- Cohort and observational studies: used cautiously, with attention to confounding and selection effects, especially for questions where RCTs aren't feasible.
- Expert opinion and clinical experience , acknowledged as such. Useful for framing, illustration, and edge cases, but not treated as definitive on its own.
Anecdotes, single case reports, popular media coverage, and social-media commentary do not constitute evidence for clinical claims on this site, although they may be discussed editorially.
How Claims Are Framed
The strength of language on this site is meant to track the strength of evidence. In practice:
- Strong, well-replicated evidence: stated plainly as what's typically observed or recommended.
- Mixed or emerging evidence: hedged with phrases like "current evidence suggests," "some studies indicate," or "the picture is still incomplete."
- Mechanism-level or theoretical discussion: clearly labeled as a model or hypothesis, not as established fact.
- Editorial perspective and opinion: clearly labeled as such, separate from clinical claims.
Why Recommendations Can Change
Evidence evolves. New meta-analyses come out. Guidelines are updated. Drug labels change. What was considered first-line five years ago may not be today. Content on this site is reviewed and revised on a recurring basis, and material updates are noted on the affected page.
For a description of how those updates happen, see the Corrections & Updates policy.
What This Site Doesn't Do
- It doesn't provide individualized medical or psychiatric advice.
- It doesn't make diagnostic claims about any reader.
- It doesn't recommend starting, stopping, or changing any medication.
- It doesn't replace evaluation by a licensed clinician who knows your history.
See the Medical & Educational Disclaimer for the full position.
Limits of the Hierarchy
No hierarchy is perfect. Meta-analyses can be poorly conducted. Guidelines can lag. RCTs can have populations that don't look like real-world patients. Where these limits matter, they are acknowledged in the relevant content rather than papered over.
International Context
Content on this site is written primarily for a US audience. Practice guidelines, drug availability, regulatory bodies, and standards of care differ internationally. Readers outside the US should rely on local guidance and clinicians familiar with their healthcare system. See the disclaimer for more on international scope.
Contact
If you believe a claim on this site is not well supported by current evidence, see Corrections & Updates or email corrections@shariqrefai.com with a link to the relevant source.