Hypnotherapy is a health topic — what Google’s framework calls YMYL (Your Money or Your Life). That means a higher bar of evidence than general-interest content. This page explains how we judge that evidence: where our sources come from, what the A–D grade on each article means, and how we label what we publish. Every grade badge and evidence table on the site links back here.
For our editorial independence, review process, and product-testing methodology, see our Editorial guidelines.
Source tiers
We anchor claims to the strongest evidence available, and we are explicit about what we will and won’t rely on.
- Acceptable primary sources: peer-reviewed clinical studies (PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane), systematic reviews and meta-analyses, clinical guidelines from recognized bodies (APA, NHS, NICE, WHO), and official statements from accredited hypnotherapy organizations (ASCH, BSCH, AHN).
- Acceptable secondary sources (with attribution): reporting from established health publications (Harvard Health, Mayo Clinic, WebMD — when citing original research), university press releases tied to published papers, and government health agency publications.
- Not acceptable as sole sources: anecdotal testimonials without clinical context, blog posts, forum threads, or social media claims, manufacturer marketing materials, and studies that have not undergone peer review.
Evidence grades
Within an article, individual claims are graded on the strength of their underlying evidence. We use a four-tier system shown via inline grade badges next to the claim, or in an Evidence Table at the end of the article.
| Grade | Tier | What it signals |
|---|---|---|
| A | High evidence | Multiple peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials and/or systematic reviews; consistent findings across independent studies; reflected in official clinical guidelines (WHO, NHS, APA, NIH). |
| B | Moderate evidence | One or more peer-reviewed observational studies or small RCTs; an emerging consistent pattern; not yet reflected in official guidelines. |
| C | Limited evidence | Expert opinion from credentialed practitioners + early-phase studies + small case series; useful, but not yet replicated. |
| D | Negligible evidence | Anecdotal claims, testimonials, manufacturer marketing, or non-peer-reviewed material only. We grade D-tier claims to make their weakness visible — we don’t refuse to mention them, but readers see them as low-confidence. |
Why we surface evidence grades: hypnotherapy contains a mix of well-researched applications (smoking cessation, IBS symptom management, anxiety) and applications with weaker or contested evidence. Grading lets readers tell these apart at a glance.
Article evidence labels
Beyond per-claim grades, each article carries one of three top-level labels reflecting how its source material was vetted:
- Rated. The article relies primarily on peer-reviewed research; individual claims are graded A–D inline; an Evidence Table summarizes the underlying studies. Most clinical and product-comparison articles carry this label.
- Unverified sources. The article references credible-but-unverified material (e.g. practitioner observations, industry reports, pre-print research not yet peer-reviewed). It is published with this label clearly marked; specific claims still carry inline grades where possible.
- Opinion / commentary. The article is editorial perspective rather than evidence synthesis — explicitly labeled; no grade badges; not used as a basis for product rating.
We use these labels rather than refuse to cover topics where peer-reviewed evidence is thin. Hypnotherapy research is uneven across applications, and excluding everything weakly-evidenced would leave readers without coverage they actively search for. We label clearly; readers can weigh accordingly.
How we describe evidence
The language we use is deliberately hedged to the strength of the evidence — and there are claims we never make.
| We use | We avoid |
|---|---|
| ”Research suggests…" | "Hypnotherapy cures…" |
| "Studies indicate…" | "Guaranteed to fix…" |
| "Evidence shows…" | "Proven to eliminate…" |
| "May help with…" | "Will solve your…" |
| "Some people report…" | "Everyone experiences…” |
Citation format. Sources are linked inline at the point of the claim. Where possible we link directly to the study DOI, PubMed entry, or official guideline document. We do not use footnote-style citations — every claim is verifiable in context.
For how this fits into our wider standards — editorial independence, the content-creation process, product-review methodology, and corrections — read our full Editorial guidelines.