Use this with the full paper, not only a headline or abstract. Capture the citation and date, then work through the prompts. Leave a field unanswered when the paper does not report it.
Prepared by Canipep as an editorial discussion tool. It has not been validated as a research-assessment instrument or independently peer reviewed.
Identify the material.
Record the exact peptide, sequence or identifier, formulation and source reported by the authors. A familiar commercial name may describe something different.
Identify the model.
Was this a cell experiment, a rodent study, a study in dogs or work in people? Note the population and why it was selected.
Name the actual question.
Separate exposure, mechanism, tolerability and clinical benefit. State the question the experiment was designed to answer.
Inspect the comparison.
Record the control group, sample size, allocation and blinding where reported. Mark missing information as missing.
Read the outcome carefully.
What was measured, when, and for how long? Distinguish a laboratory marker from an outcome that matters to a dog and its veterinarian.
Keep uncertainty visible.
Record variability, limitations and adverse findings alongside the positive findings. Note what was not measured or reported.
Check the translation.
Do the species, formulation and setting match the proposed question? Write down every step that would need further evidence.
Separate the product questions.
List the identity, manufacturing, stability, compatibility and regulatory questions that the paper does not answer.
Look for independent support.
Search for replication, contradictory results, corrections and retractions. Record funding and conflicts disclosed by the authors.
Write a bounded conclusion.
Complete: “This study supports ___ in ___ under ___ conditions. It does not establish ___.” Keep the conclusion no broader than the experiment.
A worked distinction
A 2022 BPC-157 study included pharmacokinetic work in dogs. That makes it relevant to questions about exposure under the studied conditions. It does not demonstrate clinical benefit for a proposed Canitide combination or establish a different administration route. See He and colleagues’ original paper.
Keep legal status on its own line
A publication about an ingredient does not establish a commercial product’s lawful marketing status. FDA’s unapproved animal drugs overview is a separate starting point for that question.
Take it into a conversation
Ask a researcher or veterinarian which missing information would most change their interpretation. If this checklist overlooks something useful, we welcome a suggestion through the connection page.
Download the fill-in worksheet ↓
Updated September 27, 2026 · Educational context