Editorial Policy
This page explains how PeptaBase curates peptide records, summarizes studies, applies evidence labels, and updates public research content.
How peptides are selected
Peptides and bioregulators are added when there is enough identifiable source material to support a structured record, including a stable name, usable descriptive context, and at least some research or regulatory metadata. Selection favors compounds with traceable literature, recognizable study history, or recurring relevance in peptide and bioregulator research discussions.
How content is curated
Peptide profiles are built from structured dataset fields, direct PubMed-linked citations, and manually maintained category labels. We prioritize primary literature, official approval status, and transparent study references over anonymous claims or sales-language summaries.
How evidence levels are assigned
Evidence labels are editorial shorthand for the apparent maturity of the cited research base. Labels are informed by the mix of mechanistic, animal, and human literature, along with the breadth of directly linked studies and any known development or approval history.
How studies are summarized
Study cards summarize article title, journal, year, PMID, and short context pulled from citation metadata or PubMed enrichment. Summaries are written to help users understand the study before leaving the site, not to replace the source paper.
How review and updates happen
Records are reviewed when structured fields, linked citations, or editorial notes change in the underlying dataset. Review metadata can be updated to reflect who reviewed a record, when it was revised, and whether revision notes were added to clarify the current research summary.
How live references stay current
Peptide content is updated when the dataset changes, new reference links are added, or review metadata is revised. Live PubMed links are preserved so newly indexed literature can continue to surface alongside the curated profile.