lotrevaWrite the question before the conclusion.
A useful evidence note begins with what the investigators tried to learn. Write one sentence describing the material, the model, the comparator and the measured outcome. This forces a broad phrase such as “supports recovery” into a question that can be inspected.
Keep the publication title, identifier and date alongside the note. Record whether you read the complete methods and supplementary material or only an abstract. An abstract can help triage a paper; it may not answer detailed questions about its design.
Use seven fields.
| Field | What to extract |
|---|---|
| Source | Publication identifier, date, version and access scope |
| Model | Species, cell type or participant population |
| Material | Exact compound identity and any co-interventions |
| Design | Comparator, allocation, blinding and follow-up, where applicable |
| Endpoint | What was measured and when |
| Finding | Reported estimate, uncertainty and adverse findings where relevant |
| Limits | What the study does not establish and what you could not verify |
Do not let the most striking endpoint replace the planned question.
FDA’s guidance on multiple endpoints explains that analyzing more endpoints can increase the risk of false conclusions without appropriate adjustment. When a paper reports many results, identify which question was primary and how the analysis addressed the others.
In a research note, keep a secondary or exploratory result labeled that way. A compelling figure should not acquire a stronger evidentiary status just because it makes a better headline.
Separate three kinds of sentence.
An observation reports what was measured. An interpretation proposes what it means. An application claims relevance to a different setting. Put each in its own sentence so the reader can see where direct evidence ends and inference begins.
For example, a marker change in cultured cells can be recorded as an observation. A proposed biological pathway is an interpretation. A claim about improvement in patients is an application that requires additional evidence. This example illustrates reasoning structure; it is not a result attributed to any particular compound.
Account for incomplete information.
If a method or analysis detail cannot be verified, write “not established from the available document.” Do not manufacture a sample size, invent an adverse-event rate or assume an unreported control was used. Keep a short list of the missing documents that would resolve your questions.
When a full paper replaces an earlier announcement, update the existing study record and explain what changed. Counting both as independent studies would make the evidence base look larger than it is.
Keep literature evidence separate from material evidence.
A publication may justify a research question. It does not authenticate a supplier lot. Link the literature note to the separate material-documentation record only when needed, while preserving their different purposes.
This template helps organize a review. It is not a systematic-review protocol, an expert signoff or a statement that any Lotreva material reproduces a study result.