Laden…
Transparency about our data sources, evaluation processes, and how we handle scientific uncertainty.
Read in German →Synapedia aims to make evidence-based knowledge about psychoactive substances structured, understandable, and accessible. All content serves exclusively harm-reduction and scientific education — never the promotion of consumption.
Our data is drawn from peer-reviewed publications, official databases (PubChem, DrugBank, PsychonautWiki), clinical reports, and structured community experience reports. Each source is referenced in the substance profiles.
Substance profiles go through a multi-stage quality process: automatically generated drafts are verified through community review, editorial checks, and source reconciliation. The current review status is visible on every substance page.
When scientific evidence is absent or contradictory, we label this explicitly. The evidence tier and source count indicate how reliable the presented information is. Gaps are named as such — not filled with speculation.
Experience reports and corrections from the community inform ongoing data maintenance. Anyone can report errors or add sources. Community data is clearly distinguished from scientifically substantiated information.
Content on Synapedia does not replace medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. All information is compiled in good faith but makes no claim of completeness or accuracy. Use is at your own risk.
Every substance receives a deterministic score across 6 dimensions:
Weighted coverage of key pharmacology fields: summary, mechanisms, effects, risks, safer use, dosage, duration, interactions.
Number and diversity of cited sources. PubMed-linked primary literature scores highest.
Recency of last content update. Decays from 15 points (≤30 days) to 1 point (>2 years).
Provenance quality: literature-curated (15) > manually entered (13) > AI-generated (8) > community-only (6).
Cross-field agreement: do reported mechanisms align with receptors? Do risks align with pharmacological class?
Presence of community experience reports meeting a minimum quality threshold.
Multiple peer-reviewed sources, high completeness, verified mechanisms.
Literature-referenced, editorially reviewed, good completeness.
Class-based templates, limited primary sources. Indexed with caveats.
Stub content. Not indexed in search engines.
Every data point on Synapedia carries a visible label indicating how reliable it is. Two systems work together: evidence tiers (E1–E5) classify a datum’s origin, while uncertainty operators qualify its reliability directly next to the value.
Evidence tiers (E1–E5)
At least 1 randomised controlled trial (RCT) or regulatory monograph. Strongest evidence base.
Peer-reviewed in-vitro, preclinical, or structure-based. No robust controlled human data.
Editorial synthesis from multiple consistent sources without a primary study.
Aggregated community reports (n ≥ 20), unverified. No analytical confirmation.
Few (<20) or isolated reports. Very low confidence base.
Uncertainty operators
Clinically established — at least 1 controlled study.
Scientifically plausible — in-vitro / preclinical. No robust human data.
Community observation (n ≥ 20), unverified. Individual factors vary widely.
Single / sparse observation — few (<20) or isolated reports. Very low base.
No reliable data or contradictory sources.
Editorial vs. community data
Data from clinical literature (E1–E3) appears in the primary dosage and duration section with a neutral white background. Data from community aggregation (E4–E5) appears always separately under “Reported Dose Ranges” with an amber background — never in the same visual context as clinical reference data.
Why no dosage recommendations?
Synapedia does not publish personal dosage recommendations. Tolerance, route of administration, body weight, co-substances, and individual factors vary so widely that generalised dose figures would be misleading or dangerous. We show reported ranges exclusively with explicit uncertainty labelling — never as medical or personal advice.
For information on moderation principles and prohibited content: Community Guidelines & Vendor Policy →
Every substance page has a “Report” button and a “Request correction” drawer. You can submit corrections, flag inaccuracies, or suggest additional sources. Community corrections are reviewed by the editorial system before being applied.
Synapedia is developed by Florian Lux.