Deduction trigger
Hidden measurement context
A product loses trust when it gives impressive-looking output claims without distance, protocol, or workflow context.
Trust center
How We Test Light Therapy Devices for Honesty, Safety, and Repeatable Use
This page explains how the site evaluates light-therapy products and why weak trust signals cost brands more than polished marketing copy helps them.
Best for
Scoring model
See the 100-point framework and what each bucket is meant to capture.
Best for
Point deductions
Learn the fastest ways products lose trust across categories.
Best for
Product sourcing
Understand how review independence and affiliate disclosure are handled.
Best for
Compare products
Take the trust model back into curated head-to-head comparisons.
Framework
100-point weighted score
Methodology version
v1.0 public criteria
Last updated
March 13, 2026
Spectral Head
DARKROOM SPECTRAL AUDIT
Standardized Testing Distance: 15cm / 30cm / 45cm
The 100-point score model
Every product is judged on the same five buckets, but what earns those points still depends on the category.
| Decision point | Weight | What it covers |
|---|---|---|
| Safety | 30 points | UV control, flicker behavior, eye-safety guidance, and practical comfort under repeated use. |
| Performance | 30 points | Whether the output or treatment claims hold up under category-appropriate measurement logic. |
| Usability | 20 points | Whether the product can fit a realistic routine instead of looking impressive only on a landing page. |
| Transparency | 10 points | How clearly the brand explains its claims, limitations, and testing assumptions. |
| Build quality | 10 points | Durability, stability, thermal management, and signals that the product can survive long enough to matter. |
The weighting is intentionally conservative. Safety and credible performance matter more than exciting marketing or luxury positioning.
Deduction trigger
Weak safety language
Products lose points when they rely on comforting words like safe or non-UV without explaining the basis for those claims.
Deduction trigger
Routine mismatch
A device loses credibility if the promised use case looks unrealistic once setup, comfort, or session burden are considered.
Methodology principles
These are the rules that stay consistent across the site, even when the category-specific scoring details change.
Use this framework in compareWe score by category logic
A good SAD lamp, a good acne device, and a good red-light panel are not judged by the same raw metric.
We punish missing context
Claims lose weight when they hide distance, session logic, or the practical limits of the product.
We care about routine fit
If a product cannot fit a believable daily or weekly habit, it should not score like a top-tier option.
We separate affiliate support from rankings
Commercial relationships do not change the scoring model. Methodology is the product and has to stay public.
Product sourcing
How products enter the review system
Products can enter through editorial research, recurring buyer interest, or category coverage needs. The important thing is that the same trust logic gets applied after the product arrives.
Commercial independence
Affiliate support does not change the ranking model
The site may earn commission from links, but the score model stays public and unchanged. The methodology has to survive scrutiny or the recommendation should not exist.
Apply the framework
Compare products
Use the deduction logic and score model inside curated head-to-head comparisons.
Explore
SAD lamp hub
See how the methodology shows up in comfort, distance, and safety trade-offs.
Explore
Acne device hub
See how routine fit and protocol clarity change the scoring logic for skincare tools.
Explore
Panel hub
See how output honesty and coverage logic shape panel reviews.
Explore