A study citation can make a treatment claim look settled before you have opened the paper. The useful next step is to identify what the research actually tested. A familiar word in the title does not make every result relevant to the product, goal, or person in front of you.
Read a paper as a description of one question answered under particular conditions. The checklist below helps you bring focused questions to a clinician. It does not turn a single article into an individual treatment recommendation.
Read a paper as a description of one question answered under particular conditions. The checklist below helps you bring focused questions to a clinician. It does not turn a single article into an individual treatment recommendation.
Start with the people
Look for the participants' ages, diagnoses, reasons for entering the study, and other treatments. A result in a defined endocrine disorder does not automatically describe otherwise healthy adults seeking better sleep or energy. Note how many people were included and how many finished.
The Endocrine Society adult growth hormone deficiency guideline addresses a specific clinical condition and diagnostic process. Read it in that context. Our benefits and evidence guide explains why a disease-specific recommendation and a broad wellness claim are different questions.
Name the exact intervention
Write down the substance, route, preparation, schedule, and duration described in the paper. Research on growth hormone itself is not automatically research on sermorelin. An injection is not automatically interchangeable with an oral formulation. A study of an ingredient is not an audit of a provider's compounded product.
This matters because compounded drugs are not FDA-approved. Ask your clinician what evidence applies to the exact prescription being considered and where the connection relies on an inference. See our formulation guide for the questions to take into that discussion.
Ask what it was compared with
A comparison group helps answer what might have happened without the intervention. Check whether the comparison was placebo, another treatment, usual care, or a participant's earlier measurement. A before-and-after change alone may have several explanations.
Look for whether allocation was randomized and whether participants or assessors knew the treatment assignment. These features affect interpretation, but they do not make every randomized study decisive or every observational report useless. Ask how the design affects the particular claim being made.
Separate a number from a health outcome
Was the main outcome a laboratory value, a questionnaire score, physical function, or a health event? How large was the difference, and was that difference meaningful in daily life? Our IGF-1 and outcomes guide explains why a biomarker and a patient benefit are not interchangeable.
Check the time frame too. A short study cannot answer every question about long-term use. Look for reported harms, withdrawals, and uncertainty around the estimate, not only the result highlighted in an advertisement.
Keep a small evidence note
Record the full citation, population, exact treatment, comparison, outcome, duration, and the important limitation in your own words. Then write one question: “How closely does this match the treatment and goal we are discussing?” If you cannot access the full paper, label what you read as an abstract or summary.
Use that note alongside a provider review, not as a substitute for one. The review helps with the service and billing questions; the clinician helps interpret medical relevance. Our claims guide is useful when the supporting material is a testimonial rather than a study.
The source notes
Sources & further reading
Provider pages document advertised offers, not independently proven outcomes. Historical references may concern different products or uses. Sources were checked for this edition on September 21, 2026; offers can change.