MedQuiry
Methodology

Over one hundred checks. Eight domains. One score.

MedQuiry evaluates the design and execution of a study so you can contemplate the value of its conclusions with confidence.
01

Study design

Sample components: RCT, observational, randomization, blinding, allocation concealment, control adequacy.

02

Bias control

Sample components: Selection, performance, detection, attrition, reporting bias indicators.

03

Statistical methods

Sample components: Pre‑registration, primary endpoint, power, multiplicity handling, effect size reporting.

04

Reporting completeness

Sample components: CONSORT/PRISMA/STROBE adherence, supplementary completeness, transparency.

05

Conflicts & funding

Sample components: Funding source, author disclosures, sponsor role, registry alignment.

06

Replication

Sample components: External replication of findings, prior validation, or alignment with the broader evidence base.

07

Relevance to population

Sample components: How well the study population matches the target cohort selected for the score.

08

Journal reliability

Sample components: Indexed peer review, editorial standards, and publication-venue rigor.

Study credibility
HIGH
7.5 — 10.0
Methodologically strong. Well executed. Rigorous across all MQ domains.
MEDIUM
5.0 — 7.4
Notable limitations in design, execution, or rigor in at least one MQ domain.
LOW
0.0 — 4.9
Significant methodological, design, or execution shortfalls in one or more MQ domains.
Governance

Audited by clinicians. Versioned in public.

A clinician advisory board reviews scoring drift on a published cadence. When the rubric changes, the version is recorded on every report and your saved studies become free to re‑score.

What the score is not
  • A treatment recommendation.
  • An assessment of whether the study's findings are true.
  • A judgment of how the study applies to a specific patient.
  • A measure of journal prestige or citation impact.