Editorial Standards
We publish consumer product reviews. We do not publish medical advice. This page explains how we research, write, and maintain our content — and where our limits are.
What we cover
We cover physical therapy equipment, recovery gear, and rehabilitation products you can buy and use at home. Our scope is intentionally narrow:
- Equipment categories where home use is common and reasonable (foam rollers, massage guns, TENS units, compression socks, resistance bands, braces, heating/ice therapy, KT tape, posture aids, lumbar support, acupressure mats, ergonomic furniture)
- Comparison-quality information you cannot easily get from an Amazon product page alone
- How-to techniques for using equipment safely, written generically (not as personalized advice)
How we research a product
For each product we cover, we do the following:
- Data ingestion. We pull current Amazon listing data — title, brand, bullets, specifications, customer rating, number of customer reviews, Prime eligibility — using a structured scraper. We do not paraphrase the Amazon listing into a review.
- Spec verification. We cross-reference specifications (weight, dimensions, materials, warranty) against the brand's official product page where available.
- Customer feedback themes. We sample 20–50 recent customer reviews to identify what owners praise and complain about. We do not select only positive reviews.
- Comparison. We compare against at least two alternatives in the same category, focusing on the trade-offs that matter for the use case.
- Use case framing. Every review answers: Who is this for? and Who should skip it?
- Editorial scoring. We score on five axes: build quality, performance for stated purpose, comfort/ergonomics, value tier, and warranty/support. The aggregate score (1–10) is our editorial view, not a marketing claim.
What we do not do
- We do not physically test most products we cover. Where we have, we say so explicitly. Otherwise, our analysis is informed by specifications, customer reviews, and direct comparison — and that is how we present it.
- We do not write reviews that resemble a press release. If a product has serious flaws, we say so.
- We do not change our recommendations based on commission rate. Higher-commission products are not ranked higher.
- We do not republish or summarize medical research as if it were original analysis. If we cite a study, we link it and frame it accurately.
- We do not generate reviews of products we have not researched.
How we update content
Every review carries a "Last reviewed" date. We refresh content when:
- A product is discontinued (we mark it discontinued and recommend replacements)
- A new version of a product is released (we update specs and re-evaluate)
- Customer feedback shifts materially (new complaints emerge or quality issues are reported)
- Our scoring framework is revised (rare, but possible)
Corrections
If you spot a factual error, please tell us — contact form. We acknowledge corrections in-page, with a short note above the changed section.
AI use
We use AI tools to assist in drafting articles. All articles are reviewed by a human editor before publication for: factual accuracy against source data, removal of unsupported medical claims, tone consistency, and originality. We do not publish AI-generated content unedited.
We use AI-generated illustrations for hero images on most reviews — these are studio-style product-class images, not photo-realistic depictions of specific named products (which would risk hallucinations and consumer confusion).
Conflicts of interest
If we have a non-affiliate financial relationship with a brand we cover (e.g., paid consulting), we will disclose it explicitly in the relevant article. As of the date above, we have no such relationships.
Editorial team
Sergii Samoilenko — founder and editor. LinkedIn.