Source & Review Policy
Kriyasya Ayurveda separates traditional provenance, modern research evidence, safety sensitivity, and qualified professional review. A source being mapped does not mean a practitioner has reviewed the content, and we do not present legacy content as reviewed until it has completed the V2 process.
Our principles
- We provide general wellness education — not diagnosis, prescription, dosage, or disease treatment.
- Traditional Ayurveda claims are labelled as traditional context and are not automatically presented as modern clinical evidence.
- Every migrated V2 claim is mapped to identified sources and classified by evidence basis, confidence, and safety sensitivity.
- Official or government publication does not automatically mean strong clinical evidence; evidence confidence is assessed separately for each claim.
- High-sensitivity content such as herbs, pregnancy, medicines, children, older adults, adverse effects, and chronic illness requires stronger safety controls and may require qualified review.
- Research mapping and qualified reviewer sign-off are separate states. We never imply a human expert review that has not occurred.
- Content versions and next-review dates are recorded so evidence can be rechecked as knowledge changes.
How we choose sources
Government-hosted or otherwise authoritative editions of classical texts and materia-medica references are used to document what the tradition says.
Ministry of Ayush bodies such as PCIM&H and CCRAS are used for pharmacopoeial standards, official research programmes, quality, terminology, and India-specific Ayurveda context.
Systematic/scoping reviews, clinical research, PubMed-indexed literature, and other relevant scientific evidence are used to assess what modern research can and cannot support.
WHO, NIH/NCCIH, and other appropriate public-health sources are used for evidence boundaries, safety, quality, interactions, and risk communication.
Three separate evidence dimensions
We no longer use a single A/B/C/D grade. One letter can wrongly imply that an official web page is automatically stronger scientific evidence than a research synthesis, or that a classical Ayurveda statement is the same kind of evidence as a clinical study.
1. Evidence basis
A proposition or concept traceable to an identified classical Ayurveda text or recognised traditional compendium.
An official standard, policy, pharmacopoeial source, regulator, public research body, or government publication.
A systematic review, scoping review, meta-analysis, evidence synthesis, or rigorous structured review of published research.
Human clinical research, including trials and validated clinical or psychometric studies, interpreted within design limitations.
Observational, laboratory, pharmacological, mechanistic, genomic, or other non-confirmatory evidence.
A consensus, guideline, or documented qualified-practitioner interpretation that is not itself proof of clinical effectiveness.
Low-risk non-medical wellbeing guidance that does not require a therapeutic or disease claim.
2. Evidence confidence
The precise claim wording is supported consistently by high-quality and directly relevant evidence or an authoritative standard.
Support is meaningful but has limitations in quantity, consistency, applicability, validation, or study design.
Evidence exists but is preliminary, indirect, inconsistent, small, weakly validated, or otherwise insufficient for confident conclusions.
The claim is presented as a traditional Ayurveda concept or historical usage and is not represented as established modern clinical evidence.
Available evidence is inadequate for the proposed wording. The claim must be narrowed, contextualised, or withheld.
3. Safety sensitivity
General educational or low-risk lifestyle context with little plausible harm from ordinary interpretation.
Could affect health behaviour or self-interpretation and therefore requires careful boundaries and uncertainty language.
Involves herbs/products, contraindications, pregnancy, children, older adults, medicines, chronic illness, adverse effects, or other safety-sensitive decisions.
Not appropriate for self-directed product guidance; requires qualified clinical/practitioner involvement before publication as actionable guidance.
What our trust markers mean
Sources and evidence interpretation have been recorded in the V2 research system. This does not mean a practitioner has signed off.
Research mapping is complete for a safety-sensitive claim, but qualified review has not yet been recorded.
A named, credentialed reviewer has signed off the scoped content version. This label cannot be produced automatically.
The content is being presented as traditional Ayurveda context rather than established modern clinical evidence, and qualified review has not yet been recorded.
Examples generated from the current registry
Evidence confidence: Strong · Safety sensitivity: Moderate
Evidence confidence: Strong · Safety sensitivity: High
Why we don't give dosages
Herb potency, preparation, contamination risk, interactions, individual health factors, medicines, pregnancy, age, and clinical context can materially change safety. Kriyasya Ayurveda therefore does not provide personalised herb dosages or treatment regimens in this educational product.
Why we make no disease claims
Traditional use, historical description, biological plausibility, and early research are not the same as established clinical effectiveness. Disease-treatment claims require evidence and clinical governance that fall outside this general wellness product.
Our review process
- Define the exact claim or educational concept before researching it.
- Map the claim to identified authoritative/classical and modern sources as appropriate.
- Classify evidence basis, confidence, and safety sensitivity separately.
- Check that the wording does not overstate what the sources support.
- Record the content version, research-check date, and next-review date.
- For high-sensitivity or practitioner-only content, require the appropriate qualified review before actionable guidance can be approved.
- Re-review when evidence, safety guidance, source status, or product wording materially changes.