Direct answer
PelvicEx cites evidence that materially supports a claim, links readers to legitimate public records, and writes an original synthesis. Clinical authority, recency, design quality, population match, and source-use permission are evaluated separately. A source is not used merely because it is famous, available as a download, or convenient for AI extraction.
Each page also states uncertainty and scope. A citation beside a sentence means the source informs that claim cluster; it does not mean the source endorses PelvicEx, the entire page, a named app, or an individual exercise plan.
Source hierarchy is claim-dependent
PelvicEx prefers current guidelines, consensus reports, systematic reviews, and high-quality primary studies from professional organizations, governments, journals, and established bibliographic services. Relevant specialist textbooks can supply definitions, anatomy, historical context, assessment principles, and an integrated account of a field. Public-facing government pages can improve accessible explanations and safety routing.
No single hierarchy answers every question. A randomized trial may be useful for an intervention outcome but poor for rare harms or long-term implementation. A terminology report can define a contraction without proving a treatment effect. A product developer page is appropriate for current price or advertised features but not for independent clinical effectiveness. Policy pages should describe verifiable project behavior instead of collecting unrelated medical references.
Match the source to the exact claim
Writers should identify population, problem, intervention or exposure, comparator, outcome, time frame, setting, and study design before choosing language. “PFMT improved an outcome in one trial” does not justify “Kegels cure everyone,” and evidence for supervised training cannot automatically be assigned to a self-guided timer. Evidence about female stress urinary incontinence does not automatically apply after prostate surgery, during pregnancy, or to pelvic pain.
The official Wiley record for How to Read a Paper supports systematic appraisal of design and applicability. PelvicEx uses that approach to separate established findings, plausible interpretation, uncertainty, and product extrapolation.
Usage classifications and licensing
Every catalogued source has a use class. Open-synthesis sources may support original synthesis. Research-only sources may be consulted from a lawfully available private copy while the article cites the official publisher or bibliographic record. Bibliographic-only sources identify a work but do not support substantive extraction. Excluded-AI material is unavailable for AI-assisted synthesis unless permission changes.
Source prestige does not override terms. When licence or website conditions are unclear, exclusion is the default. The ICMJE AI publishing recommendations also reinforce responsibility for citation accuracy, confidentiality, and intellectual property when AI tools are involved.
Commercial books and private files
Commercial pelvic-floor books can inform research without becoming website copy. PelvicEx does not publish local ebook paths, unofficial download links, screenshots, scanned pages, copied tables, traced diagrams, or source-derived exercise scripts. It links to records such as the official Elsevier record for Evidence-Based Physical Therapy for the Pelvic Floor and the official source for Incontinence, 7th Edition.
Drafts are written from a claim ledger rather than by paraphrasing a passage line by line. Direct quotations are normally unnecessary. If a short quotation ever materially improves accuracy, it must be legally permitted, minimal, clearly marked, and cited; a link does not grant permission to reproduce protected expression.
Citation placement and the Sources section
Substantive claim clusters should receive concise nearby links so readers can see which source matters without searching the page ending. The final Sources section repeats a complete bibliographic reference and an official or indexed destination. Frontmatter evidence identifiers connect the article to the structured catalog and validation checks.
One source may support several adjacent statements, but citations should not be sprinkled after generic advice simply to create an appearance of authority. Conversely, a long paragraph that combines anatomy, effectiveness, safety, and product claims may need to be split because each part has a different evidentiary basis.
Recency, verification dates, and updates
Clinical guidance is reviewed for currency at drafting and again when a material trigger appears, such as a revised guideline, retraction, safety notice, or contradiction from stronger evidence. Publication and update dates do not guarantee that nothing newer exists. Pages should avoid describing a source as “latest” unless that claim has been verified on the stated date.
Product comparisons are more volatile. They require a verification date, exact platform or storefront, first-party pricing and privacy source, declared commercial relationship, and a list of untested features. Paid access is not purchased for the current comparison workflow, so inaccessible features remain explicitly untested.
Disagreement and uncertainty
When eligible sources disagree, PelvicEx should not hide the disagreement by choosing the most convenient result. The article should compare population, intervention, adherence, supervision, outcome definition, follow-up, and risk of bias, then use wording no stronger than the evidence. Absence of proof is not proof of no effect, and a statistically significant result may still be small, imprecise, or not relevant to the reader.
Evidence reviews distinguish direct findings from PelvicEx interpretation. General articles omit unsupported outcome promises and universal doses. Source quantity alone does not establish that a recommendation applies to an individual.
Sources
- Greenhalgh and Dijkstra: How to Read a Paper, official Wiley record.
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors: Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing.
- International Continence Society: Incontinence, 7th Edition.
- Elsevier: Evidence-Based Physical Therapy for the Pelvic Floor, 3rd edition.
- PelvicEx structured evidence catalog and source-to-claim ledgers, inspected 1 September 2026.