Evidence hierarchy
The Centre starts with authoritative UK guidance where relevant, then appropriate professional consensus, peer-reviewed research, specialist implementation sources, Eights and Arrows programme evidence and lived experience. The right evidence type depends on the question.
Supported by appropriate current authoritative guidance.
Evidence exists, but individual experience or decision-making remains important.
A developing area where conclusions remain limited.
Evidence does not currently support a confident conclusion.
The claim conflicts with stronger evidence or lacks credible support.
An individual account, not presented as clinical proof.
Claim-level control
Every material health, scientific, legal or regulatory claim should be linked internally to its supporting source, date checked, evidence tier, relevant population, limitations, reviewer and review date. A bibliography alone is not enough for internal governance.
Original sources
Where a headline, company or social-media post refers to guidance or research, the Centre should trace the important claim back to the original source wherever reasonably possible.
AI is not evidence
AI may assist drafting and organisation, but AI-generated text is not a medical or legal source. References and material factual claims must be independently verified before publication.
NICE content
Where Eights and Arrows reuses rather than merely cites NICE copyright content, the applicable NICE licence and attribution conditions must be checked. Citing a NICE guideline does not mean NICE endorses Eights and Arrows or the Centre.
Review note
This page forms part of the Centre’s public governance information. It should be reviewed whenever relevant law, guidance, evidence or Eights & Arrows processes change.