Research
Practitioner-reported protocols
What the practitioner reference used across the site represents, why it is cited separately from peer-reviewed sources, and how to read it.
- Last updated:
- 2026-07-22
Overview
Some compound pages document "protocol" values (dose, cycle length, route, frequency) that appear in a current practitioner reference — a book, chapter, or curated summary of real-world use among clinicians and researchers, rather than a peer-reviewed trial.
Practitioner references synthesise clinical practice. They are useful because they describe what has actually been done, at what doses, in what patterns, when peer-reviewed trials do not yet exist. They are limited because they inherit the biases of the practice they describe and are not themselves controlled experiments.
Why it matters
The Preparation Calculator's example values often come from a practitioner reference rather than from a peer-reviewed trial. Understanding the source is the difference between reading it as a controlled experiment (which it isn't) and reading it as a description of common practice (which it is).
Key concepts
Descriptive, not experimental
A practitioner reference reports what practitioners have used. It does not compare that use to a placebo or to an alternative.
Source citation on the page
Every value on a compound page carries a source tag identifying which category the value came from (peer-reviewed, regulatory registry, practitioner reference, or derived arithmetic).
Not a recommendation
A dose that has appeared in a practitioner reference is not, by virtue of appearing there, safe or appropriate for any particular reader.
Common misconceptions
- "Practitioner-reference values are as strong as trial data." They are not; different weight of evidence.
- "If experienced practitioners use it, it must be safe." Widespread use is not the same as controlled evaluation.
- "Practitioner references are the same as anecdotes." A practitioner reference is a curated synthesis; a forum anecdote is a single report. Both are non-controlled, but the two are not equivalent.
Practical interpretation
Where a compound page draws a value from a practitioner reference, read the value alongside the source tag and the evidence level. Practitioner-reference values dominate compound pages where peer-reviewed trials are absent — that absence is itself information.
Limitations
Practitioner references change over time. The one cited on a compound page is the one current at the time of last editorial review.