Back to customer servicesHealth-consumer products and wellbeing providers

Evidence for meditation is not automatically evidence for your app. What is yours missing?

Your mental-support, meditation or emotional-wellbeing product is approaching an enterprise or platform buyer. Most references concern other courses, populations or professionally delivered therapies.

How does this scope address your concerns?

A method category can be mistaken for proof of your app. Brief relaxation, clicks and positive reviews can be overstated as depression or anxiety treatment evidence.

When this scope fits

Meditation, psychological-support or digital-wellbeing products with defined content, version, use schedule and users.
Teams explaining to enterprise buyers what has actually been measured and what remains missing.

When the scope needs adjusting

Diagnosis, treatment, crisis response or autonomous handling of high-risk mental-health situations requires appropriate professional services and safety pathways.
Studies of other products or therapies do not directly establish app effects; define the product before review.

REAL SOURCES · ILLUSTRATIVE REQUEST · DOWNLOADABLE SAMPLE

Mindfulness app v3: match published interventions to this version

Download sample packZIP

Published research versus app v3

01Published reference

Goyal 2014: 47 trials; low evidence for stress/distress outcomes

02Product content

v3 fixed recordings; document guidance and version

03Population/duration

Working adults, four weeks; match against each study

04Outcome boundary

Separate subjective stress, short-term relaxation, retention and satisfaction

The 47 trials and evidence rating come from the published review; app use is hypothetical. The review is not a trial of this app or a current complete evidence synthesis.

Check	Finding / sample content	Use
Content mismatch	Guided courses are not automatically equivalent to unguided recordings	Record usable design lessons and nontransferable conclusions
Evaluation question	Post-use score changes may involve expectation, natural change and missingness	Prespecify comparator, measure and adverse-experience recording

SOURCES USED IN THIS EXAMPLE

Prepared 5 Oct 2026 · Selected references, not an exhaustive systematic search

Scope & acceptance

Work covered by the quote

Agree one app version, fixed content, intended users, source and internal-record volumes, claims and specialist review.
Deliver intervention mapping, quality and applicability records, a claim-to-evidence table, gaps and evaluation framework.
Diagnosis, counselling delivery, crisis staffing and an independent clinical trial are excluded; qualified teams implement appropriate safety processes separately.

Quoted after scoping. Content volume, interaction format, version differences, users, sources and psychological/methodological review affect the fee.
Separate instrument licences, recruitment, support staffing, trial delivery and data-interface expenses.
Distinguish existing-evidence review from new research. New versions or claims require change assessment.

Acceptance criteria

Product and population evidence is distinguished from method-category evidence; direct and indirect correspondence is traceable.
Support measures, usage behaviour and disease outcomes remain separate; short-term change is not labelled long-term benefit.
The framework includes comparator, measurement, adherence, withdrawal and adverse feedback, retaining unknown and contrary findings.

Checking the evidence

Review actual app content, release logs, authorised usage data and original studies for intervention differences.
NCCIH notes differences in meditation practices and study quality and possible negative experiences. “Healing” wording is not evidence of a treatment effect.

Workflow and inputs

From inputs to delivery

Explore the workflow and deliverable structure. This preview does not run searches, read real records or produce medical findings.

01 / WORKFLOW PREVIEW

Define the support goal

Distinguish everyday-stress support, bedtime relaxation and disease treatment; freeze content and intended users.

What becomes visible

A version–content–use–outcome table.

Methods, sources and professional responsibilities

THE BASIS FOR THIS SCOPE

Why this approach? Inspect the basis.

Check the match between product, population, use conditions and outcomes before defining a supported claim.

OFFICIAL GUIDANCE

FTC · Health Products

Federal Trade Commission · US

Does the research match the product claim?

Scientific support for health-product claims should match the product and claim, rather than merely a similar ingredient.

Scope & access conditions

This is US guidance. Other markets require separate assessment; it is not an approval or compliance conclusion.

Open official source

PUBLIC DATABASE

ClinicalTrials.gov

NLM / NIH

Check studies and reported results

Review study objectives, eligibility, locations, status and reported results, then identify questions for the clinical team.

Scope & access conditions

Sponsors or investigators submit the records. A listing is not government approval of safety or effectiveness, or a determination that you should participate.

Read the official description

Open official source

METHOD REFERENCE

GRADE · Cochrane Handbook

Cochrane · Chapter 14

Show effect size and confidence separately

Present important outcomes, relative and absolute effects, available data and certainty, with reasons for downgrading.

Scope & access conditions

GRADE evaluates a body of evidence for a particular outcome. Database inclusion or one study does not automatically establish high certainty.

Open official source

These references support problem definition and evidence appraisal. Your conclusions still require project-specific sources and professional review.

The value of this commissionEOS separates experience, support outcomes and disease treatment for a fixed app/course version and use dose.

Mental, sleep and stress-support evidenceCompare alternatives and value

Users enjoy the experience. Does that demonstrate better sleep or lower stress?

What to assess	ORCHA / Exponent	Evidence OS · Commissioned scope
Service focus	ORCHA assesses digital quality/safety; Exponent offers claim study design and evaluation.	EOS separates experience, support outcomes and disease treatment for a fixed app/course version and use dose.
When to choose	Digital quality/safety assurance and product-effect evaluation are separate expert tasks.	A pilot may lock one version, one user group and up to three outcomes, with comparators, timing and adverse feedback specified.

What the fee pays for: Quote source review, measurement design and expert review; licenses, recruitment, delivery and safety assurance are separate.
Value beyond this task: Reuse purchaser summaries, outcome plans and version maps for procurement review and future studies.
How to assess value: Measure resolved procurement questions, planned evaluation measures and reusable assets; do not promise effect percentages in advance.

Verify mental/sleep reviewers; method-level evidence does not establish product effects or crisis-service qualifications.

CHECK THE OFFICIAL SERVICE SCOPEExponent · Validating Consumer Product Health Claims ORCHA · Digital Health Assessment Frameworks

References for research definitions and review methods

These sources inform product, population, use-condition and review definitions. Findings about a particular product require its original research; claims and submission requirements are checked for the target market.

Reuse and updates after delivery

Keep versioned content-to-research mapping for procurement discussions, staff training and later comparison.
Define use-dose and adverse-experience fields so iterations can develop product-specific evidence. Mental-health effects, renewals and purchases are not guaranteed.

Agree reuse rights, retention and export periods, and future update fees when scoping.

Questions before commissioning

Can we cite mindfulness research to sell the app?

Describe its background role, but check training content, guidance, duration, users and comparator. Your app needs matching product evidence; a shared method name is insufficient.

A user says “it healed me”. Is that evidence?

An authorised testimonial may describe experience, but it is not controlled research or a professionally assessed disease outcome. Separate experience, scale change and treatment effects; promotion also requires appropriate legal review.

Do high usage and click rates prove stress reduction?

They reflect use or engagement, not stress improvement by themselves. Measure the relevant outcome and consider comparators, natural changes and other support.

Define the delivery for your actual question.

Add your goal, available inputs and timing. Agree scope, review responsibilities and a quote before commissioning.

Request scope & quote

Explore other situations

Health-consumer products and wellbeing providers

You have ingredient papers. What do they actually show about your finished product?

Receive an ingredient-to-product evidence table, claim boundaries, conflicting findings and gaps, with options to obtain missing records, narrow the claim or study the finished product.

Quoted by scopeSee the deliverable

Health-consumer products and wellbeing providers

Is the new formula worth another study? Define the one thing it must show first.

Receive a version-specific gap list, priority research question, primary outcome and measurement schedule, comparator options and staged budget inputs.

Quoted by scopeSee the deliverable

Health-consumer products and wellbeing providers

An employer wants your stress-support service. Can you show what it changes?

Receive a version-specific evaluation design covering users, primary outcome, comparator, timing, service dose and delivery records, with findings separated from purchasing assumptions.

Quoted by scopeSee the deliverable

Health-consumer products and wellbeing providers

You changed the wellbeing device. Does the old evidence still apply?

Receive a version-change table, affected claim evidence, reasoned transferability assessment and next steps for bench, usability, experience or human comparison studies.

Quoted by scopeSee the deliverable

Health-consumer products and wellbeing providers

People love the experience. What does your wellbeing service actually provide?

Receive a version-specific question, measurable experience and support outcomes, relevant and inapplicable research, risk/adverse-feedback records and a staged evaluation plan.

Quoted by scopeSee the deliverable

Health-consumer products and wellbeing providers

Your product is preparing for agent-assisted procurement, but its health claims lack a verifiable evidence dossier.

Within an agreed scope, receive a machine-readable JSON dossier, a readable product explanation, a claim-to-source table and an evidence-gap list, with product versions, evidence dates, human-review and disclosure status.

Quote after scope confirmationSee the deliverable

Health-consumer products and wellbeing providers

Several health products claim to work. Before procurement, you need to know whose evidence fits your customers.

Receive a supplier-evidence comparison, source and missing-data records, comparison JSON, disagreement notes and a study-gap list. Agreed humans review the materials; authorised staff separately decide purchasing conditions, ranking criteria and orders.

Quote after scope confirmationSee the deliverable