Scoring methodology
How we calculate the score — complete transparency.
Current methodology: v1.0 (since 4/18/2026)
What is a methodology version?
Science is built on results. But not all results are equal.
Publi-Score evaluates the methodological quality of scientific publications — that is, the rigor of the process that produced the results. It is not a judgment on the truth of conclusions or the 'absolute scientific quality' of an article. This distinction is fundamental and intentional.
"We evaluate the quality of the thermometer, not the temperature it shows."
Publi-Score evaluates the process (methodological rigor, transparency, integrity), never the direction of the result (positive, negative, significant or not). Principle of directional neutrality — the authors' conclusion does not influence the score.
The formula
The 7 categories of methodological quality
Click on a category to see the sub-criteria details with a concrete example.
Integrity coefficient
The integrity coefficient is a multiplier (0 to 1) that penalizes weaknesses in transparency and independence. The lowest of the two sub-coefficients dominates.
A. Authors' integrity
- • Conflict of interest declaration
- • Funding independence
Coeff. A = average of both
B. Editorial process
- • Peer review quality
- • Submission → acceptance delay
Coeff. B = average of both
Scale — Funding independence
| Score | Situation |
|---|---|
| 1.0 | Public or academic funding (NIH, ERC, foundations, universities) |
| 0.7 | Mixed with real analytical independence — public co-funding and statistical analysis by independent third-party CRO or academic unit |
| 0.3 | 100% industry without analytical independence — includes: sponsor = manufacturer of tested device/molecule, data controlled by sponsor, lead authors paid by manufacturer |
Blocking alert signals
| Alert signal | Forced coefficient | Detection |
|---|---|---|
| Retraction | 0.0 | 100% API (PubMed + Retraction Watch) |
| Proven fraud | 0.0 | 100% API |
| Predatory journal | ≤ 0.2 | 100% API (DOAJ + Beall's) |
| Expression of Concern | ≤ 0.3 | 100% API (PubMed) |
| Editor = Author | ≤ 0.5 | PDF + manual verification |
Interpretation grid
| Tier | Score | Label | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 76–100 | Reliable | Solid methodology, reliable for decision-making |
| B | 56–75 | Mostly reliable | Correct with some identified limitations |
| C | 46–55 | Nuanced | Results to be interpreted with caution |
| D | 26–45 | Unreliable | Important methodological limitations |
| E | 1–25 | Not reliable | Difficult to use as is |
| X | 0 | Invalidated | Retracted or proven fraud — do not cite |
Example of tier X: Raoult et al. (2020) — rétracté (PMID 32205204)
Three scoring modes
Quick score
- • Input: PMID or DOI
- • Duration: ~2–5 seconds
- • Coverage: ~55/100 evaluable pts ("Metadata only")
- • 100% automatic (9 APIs)
- • Alert signals detected immediately
- • Published to catalogue
Free · Unlimited · No account
Full manual
- • Input: PMID + PDF upload
- • Duration: ~10–30 minutes
- • Coverage: 100/100 pts
- • Guided form + PDF extraction
- • All sub-criteria evaluated
- • Not published to catalogue (human bias)
Free · Unlimited · Account required
🤖 Full AI
- • Input: PMID + PDF upload
- • Duration: ~30–60 seconds
- • Coverage: 100/100 pts
- • Direct AI analysis (objective)
- • All sub-criteria evaluated
- • Published to catalogue (reproducible)
5/month · Free account · Unlimited on Premium
Scope of application
Publi-Score only evaluates empirical studies conducted on human populations and published in peer-reviewed journals.
✓ Within scope
- Randomized controlled trials (RCT)
- Cohort and case-control studies
- Cross-sectional studies on human populations
- Meta-analyses and systematic reviews
- Prospective and retrospective observational studies
⊘ Out of scope
- Preclinical — in vitro, animal models, C. elegans…
- Editorial, letter, commentary — no primary data
- Preprint — not submitted to peer review
- Narrative review — without systematic protocol (PROSPERO/PRISMA)
- Erratum — correction of an existing article
Applying the Publi-Score grid to a preclinical study would produce a misleading score. The methodological rigor of a C. elegans trial cannot be compared to that of a multicenter RCT. This exclusion is an assumed positioning decision, documented on our transparency page. transparency page.
Frequently asked questions
Answers to the most common objections and misunderstandings about the Publi-Score methodology.
For more technical objections (B1–B12, protocols C1–C7) → transparency page
Scoring modes
Publi-Score offers three analysis modes, depending on available data.
Understand the differences →The trade-offs we assume
Our methodology has real limits. We document them: 11 argued trade-offs and 7 empirical validation protocols.
Suggest an improvement
Do you have a suggestion to improve the scoring grid? Share it — every proposal is reviewed by our team.