Evidence methodology
Currently 33 claims and 70 sources, each assessed with the rules below.
Scale
The level is shown with a letter, a shape and text, never with colour alone. "It doesn't work" and "the evidence is not yet sufficient" are different things; the cards use the latter.
- ● A · Strong evidence
- Several high-quality systematic reviews or randomised trials with consistent results.
- ◆ B · Moderate evidence
- A few controlled studies or meta-analyses; reasonable but limited generalisability.
- ▲ C · Preliminary/mixed evidence
- Small trials or pilot studies; inconsistent results.
- ■ D · Insufficient evidence
- No clinical support; only laboratory findings, anecdotes or a single small study.
- ✦ T · Traditional/spiritual practice
- No scientific claim is made; it is offered as a cultural or personal practice.
- ○ Soundscape, no claim
- No health or mental-effect claim at all; it is simply a soundscape.
Rules
- A session is never shown as stronger than the weakest scientific claim it relies on, and the claim's technique (e.g. binaural beats) must actually be present in the session.
- Every source's citation, DOI or PMID is checked one by one against its Crossref or PubMed record. Fields that cannot be found are left empty; no number or citation is guessed.
- A retracted publication is never used as evidence; such publications are listed separately in the library.
- Every claim has a version and a changelog, and every claim is reviewed again at least every six months.
- Traditional and spiritual practices (✦ T) are never presented as scientific claims. Dangerous or legally risky claims are never included in the product.
- Arayüzdeki ve pazarlamadaki her metin otomatik bir dil denetleyicisinden geçer: teşhis, tedavi ya da iyileşme vaadi ve hastalık adlarıyla fayda iddiası yayınlanamaz.
AI and review
The first drafts of the claim texts were prepared by an AI model (Claude). Before publication, every source's citation was re-verified against primary records (Crossref, PubMed/Europe PMC, ClinicalTrials.gov), the figures were checked against the studies' abstracts and open-access full texts, and the errors found were corrected. Publication was approved by Frekans Studio. No independent scientific adviser has reviewed it yet. Each card shows the last and next review dates.
Conflicts of interest
Frekans Studio has no commercial relationship with any manufacturer, device company or research group.