Score breakdown · Provider-Selection Integrity rubric
| Criterion | Awarded | Max | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Payment & affiliate disclosure | 21 | 25 | Disclosure inline on ranking pages. Identifies commercial partners by entity name. -4 for the disclosure language being shared with parent-network boilerplate rather than tailored to this site's pharmacy-classification emphasis. |
| Provider-selection methodology | 18 | 20 | Six-Pillar framework applied, with pharmacy-classification weighted as the heaviest selection criterion. -2 for the methodology page being shared with the parent network rather than locally authored to reflect this site's focus. |
| Author E-E-A-T | 18 | 20 | Named MD reviewer with verifiable credentials. -2 for editor and reviewer being the same individual on a subset of older pieces. |
| Provider verification rigor | 14 | 15 | Pharmacy verification is the audit's strongest single performance: 503A/503B status is verified per provider against state board records, with the registry citation linked on the review page. Licensure verified per state. -1 for clinical-staff verification depth varying by provider. |
| Pricing transparency | 10 | 10 | Pricing structure verified. Dose-structure distinguished. Flat-rate compound pricing tied to specific 503A/503B sourcing arrangements. |
| Update cadence & corrections | 12 | 10 | Per-page review dates. Public corrections log linked. Capped at 10. |
| Total | 93 | 100 |
Note: Criterion 6 effective performance scored at 12/10; capped at 10.
Editorial findings — strengths
- Pharmacy classification (503A vs 503B) is treated with the most depth and rigor of any audited site — not as a glossary entry but as a primary selection criterion.
- State pharmacy board citations are linked to the underlying state board record, not paraphrased.
- Pricing structure is tied to pharmacy-sourcing arrangements in a way that helps patients understand why flat-rate pricing is or is not sustainable for a given provider.
Editorial findings — weaknesses
- Affiliate disclosure language is shared parent-network boilerplate rather than tailored to this site's pharmacy emphasis.
- Methodology page is inherited rather than locally authored.
- Editor and reviewer are the same individual on a subset of older pieces, weakening the editorial-distinction principle.
Adjudication note
One-point discrepancy across the matrix. Below the four-point threshold. No adjudication. Final: 93/100. Signed off May 19, 2026.
Score-challenge protocol: /editorial-standards.html#right-of-reply · Methodology: /methodology.html · ← All reviews