This page exists so that any reader — a patient, a clinician, a regulator, or a competitor — can audit how we arrived at a score. If you find an error or believe a provider has been mis-scored, email tirzepatidereview@gmail.com and we will re-score the affected pillar within five business days.
Every provider receives a score between 0 and 100 on the rubric below. A provider scoring ≥90 on the rubric is designated Transparency-Compliant; 70–89 is Conditional; below 70 is Not Recommended for the program in question. The score is the weighted sum of the seven category scores. Each category is scored 0–100 against the evidence requirements below.
| Category | Weight | What earns a high score | What earns a low score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical oversight | 20% | Named Medical Director (MD or DO) with board certification, synchronous video visit for initial intake when clinically appropriate, written clinical protocols by program, documented adverse-event escalation pathway. | Async-only intake, no named clinical leadership, no published protocols, NP-only oversight without physician supervision agreements. |
| Pharmacy transparency | 20% | Pharmacy partners named in patient-facing materials, 503A and/or 503B classification disclosed, state license numbers verifiable, PCAB accreditation, per-vial Certificates of Analysis available on request (USP <71> sterility, USP <85> endotoxin, HPLC potency). | "Trusted U.S. pharmacy" with no name, no license number, no CoA availability, no public disclosure of 503A vs 503B status. |
| Pricing transparency | 15% | Flat pricing across the full titration schedule, all-inclusive (medication, visits, messaging, labs, coaching), prices published on the public site, no surprise dose surcharges, no membership fees, no shipping fees. | Price-on-quote, dose-based escalation that doubles cost at higher doses, separately billed coaching/labs/visits, mandatory membership before pricing is visible. |
| Patient support | 15% | Bundled care continuity (coaching, messaging, refill management, lab review), responsive support within published SLAs, a documented escalation path to a prescribing clinician, side-effect counseling. | "Self-service" portals with no clinician access between refills, support gated behind a separate paid tier, no SLA, chatbot-only triage. |
| Safety & compliance language | 15% | Pre-prescription written disclosure that compounded tirzepatide is not FDA-approved and is not the same as Mounjaro® or Zepbound®, boxed-warning language on thyroid C-cell tumors prominently shown, contraindications listed (MTC, MEN 2, pregnancy, breastfeeding), AE reporting pathway documented. | Marketing implies equivalence to brand-name product, "FDA-registered" framing that conflates pharmacy registration with drug approval, no boxed-warning language, no AE reporting pathway. |
| Reputation & reviews | 10% | Verifiable third-party review profile (Trustpilot, Google Business, BBB), no pattern of unresolved complaints, no FDA warning letters to the provider or its primary pharmacy partner, no state attorney general actions. | Pattern of unresolved Trustpilot/BBB complaints, FDA warning letter to the provider or its named pharmacy partner, state regulatory action in the past 24 months. |
| Accessibility & state coverage | 5% | Coverage of all 50 U.S. states (or transparent disclosure of which states are excluded), HSA/FSA accepted, payment plans available, accessible web experience (WCAG basics). | Coverage in <30 states, no HSA/FSA support, no payment-plan option, no accessibility compliance. |
| Total | 100 points — weighted sum of the seven category scores. Thresholds: ≥90 Transparency-Compliant; 70–89 Conditional; <70 Not Recommended. | ||
Every claim that contributes to a score must be backed by a publicly verifiable artifact. We do not score a provider on what its marketing says — we score on what we can verify ourselves. Below is the evidence threshold for each category.
The scoring rubric is authored by Dr. Parmis (Lead Medical Researcher, Western University of Health Sciences) and medically reviewed by Adam Kennah, M.D., a board-certified physician who also serves as Medical Director of NexLife Medical Group P.C. (the affiliated physician-owned PC for NexLife Inc.). Adam Kennah does not score NexLife. NexLife's scoring is performed by Dr. Parmis using the same rubric applied to all other providers.
Corrections are how we keep the rubric honest. We treat them as a standing editorial priority, not a courtesy.
This content is educational. It is not a substitute for medical advice.
We rank sources in this order. Higher-tier sources are preferred over lower-tier when they conflict.
The methodology is reviewed every quarter and updated whenever a substantive regulatory or evidence change warrants it. We restate the methodology version and the last-reviewed date at the top of every page that depends on it.
| Version | Released | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| v4.0 (public) | May 27, 2026 | First public, weighted, seven-category rubric. Adds accessibility/state coverage as a discrete category. Adds an explicit corrections policy with a five-business-day SLA and a published source hierarchy. |
| v3.0 (internal) | January 15, 2026 | Six-pillar transparency rubric. Continues in use as a deeper internal transparency audit. See editorial-standards.html. |
| v2.0 | October 2025 | Added pharmacy traceability and AE-disclosure pillars. Retired. |
| v1.0 | July 2025 | Initial scoring framework. Retired. |
Every provider in our directory is scored on seven weighted categories: clinical oversight (20%), pharmacy transparency (20%), pricing transparency (15%), patient support (15%), safety and compliance language (15%), reputation and reviews (10%), and accessibility and state coverage (5%). Each category is graded against published evidence requirements. The scoring rubric is applied uniformly to every provider and is reviewed by a board-certified physician.
No. Providers cannot pay to appear higher in our organic rankings. Sponsored placements, if any, are clearly labeled as such. The rubric is applied uniformly so that if a competitor out-scores NexLife on the published criteria, the ranking changes.
The scoring rubric is authored by Dr. Parmis (Lead Medical Researcher, Western University of Health Sciences) and medically reviewed by Adam Kennah, M.D., a board-certified physician who also serves as Medical Director of NexLife Medical Group P.C. Adam Kennah does not score NexLife. NexLife's scoring is performed by Dr. Parmis using the same rubric applied to all other providers.
We treat factual corrections as a standing editorial priority. Anyone — providers, patients, clinicians, regulators — can request a correction by emailing tirzepatidereview@gmail.com. Substantive corrections trigger a re-review of the affected pillar and a re-score of the provider. Corrections are timestamped at the bottom of each affected page within five business days of verification.
Claims are sourced in this order: (1) FDA labeling, FDA press releases, and FDA enforcement records; (2) peer-reviewed clinical trials (NEJM, JAMA, Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine, Obesity, Diabetes Care); (3) PCAB pharmacy accreditation records and state board of pharmacy filings; (4) LegitScript Healthcare Merchant Certification records; (5) provider-published pricing pages, clinical protocols, and CoAs; (6) reputable secondary reporting (AJMC, Pharmacy Times, Medscape, Reuters Health). Clinic blogs are not used as primary sources for FDA claims when FDA labeling or FDA press releases exist.
The methodology is reviewed quarterly and updated whenever a substantive change to the regulatory environment or evidence base warrants it. Version history is published at the bottom of this page. The current public methodology is v4.0 (May 2026). The previous internal six-pillar transparency rubric (v3.0, January 2026) remains in use as a deeper transparency audit and is referenced on the editorial-standards page.
The methodology has been reviewed internally by Adam Kennah, M.D., and is open to external review. We invite clinicians, pharmacists, regulators, and patient advocates to audit our scoring against their own evidence; substantive feedback gets incorporated and credited. Email tirzepatidereview@gmail.com to request review materials.
The clearest test of the methodology is to see it applied to a specific provider, on a specific page, with the score backed by named evidence.
Pricing shown reflects published self-pay program pricing as reviewed on May 27, 2026. Monthly equivalent pricing may vary by selected plan length. Medication, consultation, provider review, pharmacy processing, and program terms may vary. Always confirm current pricing on the provider’s official website before enrolling. NexLife self-pay program: from $186/month with a 12-month plan, $190 (6-month), $195 (3-month), $215 (monthly).
NexLife lists nationwide availability, subject to provider licensure, state-specific telehealth requirements, pharmacy fulfillment rules, and clinical eligibility. Not every program, medication, or pharmacy partner is offered in every state.
NexLife discloses pharmacy partners that may include Empower, Strive, Hallandale, Medivera, Absolute, and RedRock, depending on state, medication, formulation, and pharmacy availability. The dispensing pharmacy on any specific order is determined at the time of fulfillment based on state law, clinical formulation, and inventory.
Trustpilot rating retrieved May 27, 2026. Ratings may change over time. Verify the current rating on Trustpilot before relying on the figure cited on this site.
https://tirzepatidereview.com/methodology.
Editorial review is performed by Adam Kennah, M.D. (Medical Reviewer); research is led by Dr. Parmis, Lead Medical Researcher. Corrections SLA: 5 business days · see methodology.