How We Rate Evidence
Every claim on TryTrutide is assigned an evidence level based on the quality and type of research supporting it. This system helps readers understand the strength of the evidence behind each statement — from Phase 3 randomized controlled trial data down to anecdotal community reports.
Why evidence ratings matter
Retatrutide is an investigational compound with a rapidly evolving evidence base. Phase 2 trial data is robust; Phase 3 TRIUMPH data is emerging. Community reports, while valuable for hypothesis generation, are not clinical evidence. Our rating system makes these distinctions explicit so readers can calibrate their confidence accordingly.
The six evidence levels
Phase 3 randomized controlled trial data (TRIUMPH program). The highest level of evidence available for retatrutide. Pre-specified endpoints, blinded, large populations.
Phase 2 RCT data or meta-analysis of multiple controlled studies. Strong evidence with some limitations in population size, duration, or generalizability.
Observational studies, retrospective analyses, or single-arm trials. Directionally useful but subject to confounding and selection bias.
Expert opinion, mechanistic reasoning, or extrapolation from related compounds (e.g., semaglutide, tirzepatide). Not direct retatrutide evidence.
Anecdotal community reports (Reddit, forums, social media). Useful for identifying patterns and generating hypotheses. Not clinical evidence.
Unsupported, contradicted by available evidence, or originating from a source with a clear commercial conflict of interest. Flagged for reader awareness.
Limitations of this system
Evidence ratings reflect the best available information at the time of publication. Retatrutide's evidence base is evolving rapidly — ratings are updated as new trial data is published. A lower rating does not mean a claim is false; it means the supporting evidence is weaker or less direct. Always consult a licensed physician before making any medical decisions.