This handout has been edited only slightly from the original, which pertained to medical information on the web. Scientific criteria for evaluation of evidence compare closely to those for the evaluation of historical evidence.
| yes | no | Criterion | Description |
| Source | Source is credible* | ||
| Credentials | Source has appropriate credentials* | ||
| Conflict of interest | Source reveals any sponsorships etc. that could create conflicts of interest | ||
| Context | Information was provided in appropriate context to the subject being discussed | ||
| Currency | Information is current* | ||
| Editorial review process | Has the site been reviewed by appropriate experts? | ||
| Accuracy | Is the information presented on the site accurate?* | ||
| Hierarchy of evidence | Did evidence include primary sources or reliable secondary works? Hearsay?* | ||
| Original source stated | Did the site provide the original sources of the information it presents?* | ||
| Disclaimer | Did the site give an appropriate disclaimer explaining the limits of its applicability? | ||
| Omissions | Did the site list any omissions to its information and provide links/references to find that information? | ||
| Purpose of the site | Did the site provide a clear mission statement or statement of purpose?* |
*More important for historical research.