Our Data

The Mytavin Medical Review Board (MRB), which consists of licensed medical professionals, conducted a thorough search of the top prescribed pharmaceutical medications within reputable drug databases as well as peer-reviewed literature, including:

  • PubMed
  • U.S. Food & Drug Administration
  • American Academy of Family Physicians
  • Journal of the American Medical Association
  • Science Direct
  • Natural Medicines Database (TRC)

To assess whether a specific reference or citation would warrant inclusion in the depletions database, MRB graded the quality of the evidence as follows:

Level Qualifying studies
A Systematic review or meta-analysis of human trials
B Human RDBPC trials. ≥ 2 studies and/or 1 study with ≥ 50 subjects
C Human RDBPC trials or RCTs. 1 study < 50 subjects
D Human trials or in-vivo animal trials
N/A After a comprehensive search, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that any significant nutrient depletions exist for this medication

A Level Evidence
Mytavin’s grading prioritizes systematic reviews and meta-analyses of human trials, which are combinations of findings from multiple studies to form a consensus on a clinical hypothesis. They are often considered the highest level of evidence available,

B Level Evidence
Randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled (RDBPC) trials are also rated relatively highly as B-level evidence but should consist of at least 50 subjects. While a sample size of n = 30 is generally considered necessary for statistical significance, a sample size of 50 participants is favorable for RDBPC studies based on our team’s research experience and margin of error tolerance. RDBPCs are considered the gold standard in conducting clinical trials.

C Level Evidence
Randomized controlled trials (RCT), which may lack methodological procedures to control bias (e.g., no placebo, no blinding) whether by the fault of the study design itself or the need to adhere to ethical standards, are rated moderately as represented by C-level evidence. These trials can provide moderate-level evidence via comparison to a specified control group. RDBPCs with less than 50 subjects are also represented under this level of evidence to account for population sizes.

D Level Evidence
Human trials with no comparison group, lacking controlled study designs, or retrospective analyses are ranked alongside animal trials with D-level evidence. These human trials often solely examine the effect of a single intervention without the inclusion of a relevant comparable intervention or are limited to measuring associated outcomes. Animal trials are a pre-clinical means to examine potential physiological relationships between an intervention and an outcome but are not necessarily generalizable to the human population.

For inclusion in the Mytavin database, A-D level citations were prioritized for supportive evidence. In an effort to provide only the most clinically significant information for practitioners, any evidence graded as level D or lower did not meet the minimum requirements for inclusion in the database.

We take the accuracy of our data seriously as it’s depended upon by practitioners and patients alike. If you have any concerns or feedback regarding our data, please contact us.

Download our latest guide:

Addressing Pharmaceutical Interactions in Clinical Practice

Please let us know where to send the guide: