Methodology
How we score, and what we refuse to score
A review site is only worth reading if you can check its work. Weights are fixed before any vendor is evaluated, published in full, and applied identically to every vendor in the set.
Weights
Six dimensions
Clinical rigor and outcomes evidence together carry 45% of the score. That is deliberate. They are the two dimensions that determine whether a program produces anything, and the two that vendors are least able to improve through better sales execution.
Member experience carries the least weight at 8%. It matters, but it is the dimension most easily confused with product polish, and the one most likely to flatter a well-funded vendor with a weak clinical model.
Clinical rigor
25%Prescriber credentials, titration protocol, comorbidity screening, and off-ramp planning.
Outcomes evidence
20%Quality of published results: peer review, sample size, control group, and follow-up duration.
Cost control
20%Ability to hold net pharmacy spend down: gating, biosimilar strategy, and risk sharing.
Data & reporting
15%Eligibility-level reporting, claims feeds, and whether you can audit the vendor's own numbers.
Integration
12%PBM, carrier, HRIS, and point-solution interoperability without custom engineering.
Member experience
8%Time to first appointment, app quality, care-team continuity, and support responsiveness.
Evidence
Not all outcome claims are the same kind of thing
Every vendor cites results. The four-tier scale below is how we distinguish a randomized trial from a number on a slide, and it feeds directly into the outcomes evidence score.
Peer-reviewed RCT
Randomized, controlled, externally reviewed.
Peer-reviewed observational
Published cohort data, no randomization.
White paper
Vendor-authored, methodology disclosed but not independently reviewed.
Vendor-reported
Marketing figure with no published methodology. Treat as a claim, not a result.
Exclusions
What we refuse to score
Funding and valuation. A well-capitalized vendor can sustain a weak model longer. That is a risk factor, not a quality signal, and we will not let it inflate a score.
Brand and marketing quality. Strongly correlated with enrollment, essentially uncorrelated with clinical outcomes or three-year cost.
Demo quality. We have watched superb demos from vendors with no published evidence and clumsy ones from the best-evidenced company in the category.
Client logos. A large employer’s name on a slide tells you that a sales team won a deal, not that the program worked.
Process
How a review gets made
- 1
Desk research
Public filings, published studies, regulatory records, and vendor documentation are collected and dated before any conversation happens.
- 2
Vendor briefing
We request a technical briefing focused on clinical protocol and reporting. Vendors may decline; we note it and review them anyway from public sources.
- 3
Buyer interviews
We speak with benefits leaders who have actually contracted the vendor, including at least one who did not renew where we can find them.
- 4
Scoring
A named reviewer scores each dimension against the rubric and records the rationale. A second reviewer challenges any score that moves the overall rank.
- 5
Right of reply
Vendors see their factual attributes before publication and may correct errors of fact. They do not see or influence scores, verdicts, or rank.
- 6
Re-review
Every vendor is re-reviewed at least annually, and immediately on a material change in pricing, clinical model, or ownership.
Independence
No vendor pays for placement, rank, inclusion, or coverage. We accept no affiliate commission or referral fee on any vendor in the directory. Our revenue comes from advisory work with buyers and from paid research subscriptions.
Corrections
Errors of fact are corrected promptly and noted on the page with a date. Disagreements about judgment are not corrections; where a vendor disputes a verdict we will publish their response alongside it.
Limitations
Scores are comparative within this set, not absolute. Pricing bands reflect what buyers report and will differ from your quote. Nothing here is medical advice or a substitute for your own clinical and legal review.