01
Source classes
The method distinguishes official sources, clinic sources and established third-party sources from discovery-only material.
Veneer Clinic Ranking Methodology
Understand how methodology v1.3 evaluated published evidence about veneer clinics in Colombia for U.S. patients. This is the frozen July 24, 2026 research method, with its original thresholds, source rules and limitations. It is not a clinical outcome audit.
Compare the questions before you choose a clinic or plan a trip.
Quick Answer
Methodology v1.3 scores public evidence using defined source classes, category weights, completeness rules and qualification gates. The frozen July 24, 2026 method is more permissive than v1.2, which produced no normal qualifiers. Missing or contradicted evidence earns zero. These dated scores describe available documentation; no clinical outcome audit or on-site verification was performed.
The question behind the scoring
This method defines how public evidence was evaluated for U.S. patients researching veneer clinics in Colombia. The freeze timestamp and research cutoff serve different purposes: the method was frozen before its rescore, while the version history records the completed results.
Freeze timestamp
2026-07-24 16:35 EDT
Research cutoff
2026-07-24
Research question
Which Colombian clinics offering veneers appear best suited for U.S. patients based on useful public evidence available at the research cutoff?
The answer is an editorial comparison of observable evidence, not a declaration of clinical superiority or universal safety.
Three parts of the evidence model
02
Completeness and qualification
Completeness measures documented evidence groups. Normal qualification separately requires every listed gate.
03
Scoring
Category weights and exact evidence anchors govern the points. A score describes public evidence under this method, not a treatment outcome.
Read the weights and qualification gates
The full scoring model follows, including the source classes, completeness calculation, normal gates, travel and review rules, and named exception. These remain the frozen v1.3 rules.
Source classes
- Class A: government, professional registry, airport, airline, or public-health source.
- Class B: clinic website, named clinician page, clinic policy, or official clinic channel.
- Class C: established review platform, recognized directory, reputable reporting, or reliable route-planning source.
- Class D: unsupported listicle, search snippet, scraped summary, or AI answer. Class D is discovery-only.
Completeness
The v1.3 evidence model contains 31 practical public-evidence groups.
Completeness = (verified groups + 0.5 x partially verified groups) / 31 x 100.
A normal finalist needs at least 35 percent overall completeness. There is no per-category completeness floor.
Score and category weights
| Category | Points |
|---|---|
| Credentials and operating identity | 15 |
| Veneer-specific cases | 15 |
| Patient feedback | 10 |
| Diagnostics and treatment planning | 8 |
| Materials and laboratory transparency | 7 |
| Safety and clinical accountability | 10 |
| English communication | 12 |
| Travel accessibility | 12 |
| Remote coordination and aftercare | 6 |
| Pricing transparency | 5 |
| Total | 100 |
The frozen evidence schedule defines the exact anchors. Partial points are allowed only where an anchor permits them. No bonus points exist.
Normal qualification gates
A normal finalist must satisfy all of these:
- Identifiable operating clinic in Colombia.
- Published physical location.
- Explicit veneer service.
- At least one named dentist, clinical lead, or identifiable treating team.
- No unresolved material identity or closure conflict.
- Overall score of at least 42 out of 100.
- Evidence completeness of at least 35 percent.
- English score of at least 2 out of 12.
- Travel score of at least 3 out of 12.
- Coordination and aftercare score of at least 1 out of 6.
- Total U.S.-patient accessibility score of at least 8 out of 30.
Travel method
ATL remains the consistent reference origin. Current route practicality can be supported by Class A airline or airport sources or Class C route-planning sources. The score evaluates whether the destination is ordinarily reachable nonstop or with a practical connection, broader U.S. gateway connectivity, airport transfer practicality, and clinic travel support. Ticket prices do not affect the score.
Review method
The full v1.2 Bayesian dataset is no longer required. A clinic can earn partial review points from attributable current public patient feedback. Maximum review credit still requires an independent platform with usable rating, count, recency, and veneer relevance. Clinic-hosted testimonials can earn limited credit only when clearly presented as patient feedback and never count as independent validation.
Odonto Súper
Odonto Súper is evaluated under the same v1.3 anchors. It may be exempt from score, completeness, English, travel, coordination, and total-accessibility minimums, but not identity, Colombian location, operating status, veneer service, disclosure, or honest scoring. If it does not qualify normally, it appears outside the normal rank order as the predefined non-ranked comparison inclusion and does not displace a normal finalist.
See how selection and version history fit together
The method records how ties and sensitivity were handled, why v1.3 replaced v1.2, and what the research cannot establish. The historical status at freeze is retained with the later version history; this page does not announce a new rescore.
Selection and tie breakers
After rescoring the full pool and completing the two preserved saturation rounds, select the fourteen highest-scoring clinics that pass every v1.3 normal gate. Tie breakers remain: total U.S.-patient accessibility, safety, completeness, case score, then alphabetical order. The overall score ranges from 0 to 100.
Sensitivity analysis
The five frozen scenarios are baseline, clinical emphasis, safety governance, U.S. accessibility, and reputation reviews. Baseline remains the primary ordering. Scenario scores rescale category percentages. The published results report rank ranges, leader changes, and ties within one point.
Governance
Preserve v1.2 and its zero-qualifier result as a historical stricter edition. Do not silently overwrite it. Version 1.3 applies to every candidate equally and was frozen before its rescore. Any later factual correction must be logged and applied consistently.
Status at freeze
No clinic had been rescored under v1.3.
Version history
v1.0: Calibration framework. v1.1: Expanded evidence model. v1.2: Strict thresholds, zero normal qualifiers. v1.3: Relaxed thresholds, 29 normal qualifiers, 14 selected. All 48 candidates rescored. Colombia Smile Studio remained excluded.
Why v1.3 replaced v1.2: v1.2 produced zero qualifiers among 48 candidates. Version 1.3 is more permissive but remains bounded. Missing evidence earns zero. Contradicted evidence earns zero and is disclosed.
Limitations
Scores reflect public evidence completeness only. No clinical outcome audit or on-site verification was performed. Results are bounded by the cutoff date and available public sources. Search snippets remain discovery-only unless the underlying source is attributable and the claim is independently preserved.
Publisher conflict disclosure
Published and funded by Colombia Smile Studio. Colombia Smile Studio was excluded from Phase 1 discovery, scoring, and ranking.
Checksum
716c8d4343114877777e43ede928c406fb0ac77b65c098546e09cd82827661cb
Data downloads
Continue your research
This page is for education only and does not replace an individual dental examination. Read the Terms and Medical Disclaimer.
Keep the verification questions together
Use the veneer travel guide to organize your treatment and clinic questions alongside the research.
Patient questions
Frequently asked questions
What evidence does methodology v1.3 score?
Version 1.3 scores public evidence across credentials and operating identity, veneer cases, patient feedback, diagnostics, materials and laboratory transparency, safety and accountability, English communication, travel accessibility, remote coordination and aftercare, and pricing transparency. Class A covers official sources, Class B clinic sources, and Class C established third-party sources. Class D material is discovery-only. The score is not a clinical outcome audit.
How are evidence completeness and qualification calculated?
The 31-group completeness formula is (verified groups + 0.5 x partially verified groups) / 31 x 100. Normal qualification requires an identifiable operating clinic in Colombia, a published location, explicit veneer service, a named dentist or identifiable treating team, and no unresolved material identity or closure conflict. Minimums are 42/100 overall, 35 percent completeness, 2/12 English, 3/12 travel, 1/6 coordination and aftercare, and 8/30 total U.S.-patient accessibility. There is no per-category completeness floor.
How are ties and ranking sensitivity handled?
Tie breakers run in this order: total U.S.-patient accessibility, safety, completeness, case score, then alphabetical order. The five frozen sensitivity scenarios are baseline, clinical emphasis, safety governance, U.S. accessibility, and reputation reviews. Baseline remains the primary ordering. Scenario scores rescale category percentages; published results report rank ranges, leader changes and ties within one point.
Why did methodology v1.3 replace v1.2?
Version 1.2 used strict thresholds and produced zero normal qualifiers among 48 candidates. Version 1.3 relaxed those thresholds, producing 29 normal qualifiers with 14 selected after all 48 candidates were rescored. Colombia Smile Studio remained excluded. Version 1.2 is preserved as a historical edition. Version 1.3 was frozen before its rescore, and missing or contradicted evidence earns zero; contradicted evidence is disclosed. These are historical results, not a new rescore.