Evidence tier scorer

Cancer study quality scorer

Use this tool when a page cites a study to support a baking soda, sodium bicarbonate, alkaline, or alternative cancer claim. The output is an evidence-literacy tier, not a treatment recommendation.

Not medical advice: A study score cannot tell whether a patient should start, stop, delay, or change cancer care.

Enter study features

Study type

Sample size

Design features

Has a control or comparator group Random assignment when the question allows it Blinding or objective outcome assessment Patient-relevant endpoints such as survival, progression, symptoms, quality of life, or serious harms Adverse events and withdrawals reported Cancer type, stage, eligibility, and exclusion criteria defined Protocol registered or methods prespecified Conflicts of interest and funding disclosed Replicated or consistent with independent evidence

Hypothesis only

0 / 28

Select study features to generate an evidence tier and plain-English explanation.

What this means

Questions still to ask

Study scorer FAQ

Can a mouse study ever be useful?

Yes. Animal studies can be useful for mechanisms and hypotheses, but they are not enough to recommend a cancer treatment to patients.

Why does the scorer ask about patient-relevant endpoints?

Cancer treatment decisions should depend on outcomes that matter to patients, such as survival, progression, symptoms, quality of life, and harms.

Does this replace a systematic review or clinician judgment?

No. It is a teaching tool that helps readers ask better questions before discussing evidence with a qualified clinician.