Science

Methodology overview

trune™ is built on a scientific reality: people respond differently. Our methodology combines nutritionist-validated decision rules, safety-first dosing guardrails, and iterative within-person evaluation to learn what works for each individual.

The Scientific Case

Why personalization is scientifically justified

Multiple large studies show substantial interindividual variability in metabolic responses—even to standardized meals—supporting methods that learn within-person rather than relying solely on population averages.

Key evidence

Personalized prediction of glycemic responses demonstrates that the same foods can produce very different post-meal responses across people.

Key evidence

Large-scale "precision nutrition" work (e.g., PREDICT 1) observed large inter-individual variability in postprandial metabolic responses and developed models to predict those responses.

Same meal, different curves

Time after meal (hours)Response
Person A
Person B
Person C

Averages can hide what's true for you.

Personalization Pipeline

How personalization works in practice

We operationalize personalization as a structured process: define evidence-backed options, apply safety constraints, choose a small set to test, measure response repeatedly, and update based on observed within-person effects.

Nutritionist Validation

Nutritionist-validated by design

Our methodology aligns with evidence-based dietetics principles: integrate best available research, professional expertise, and the individual's goals/constraints. Nutritionists define the decision rules and safety constraints; the platform executes them consistently and documents changes.

Nutritionist Review Gates

Evidence synthesis

Protocol template creation

Contraindication rules

Dosing bounds

Review gates

Versioned updates

Aligned with Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics evidence analysis process

Evidence Grade Badges

Safety First

Safety-first dosing guardrails

For nutrients with established reference values, we use Dietary Reference Intake concepts—including Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (ULs). ULs are defined as the highest daily intake likely to pose no risk of adverse effects for almost all individuals; risk increases above the UL.

Guardrails are applied before optimization.

Dose Window Visualization

UL (Tolerable Upper Intake Level)
Target therapeutic range
Minimum effective dose

Adjust dose position

Contraindication Filter Demo

Toggle conditions to see how the protocol library responds:

Magnesium Glycinate
Ashwagandha
L-Theanine
Vitamin D3
Omega-3
⚠ Higher Scrutiny

Botanicals require higher scrutiny

Botanical ingredients can have meaningful effects but may carry rare adverse events or interaction risks. Our methodology applies stricter eligibility rules, tighter dosing bounds, and more aggressive monitoring for botanicals than for basic nutrition support.

Athlete Ready

Athlete-ready methodology

In high-performance sport, supplement use requires risk analysis because contamination and inadvertent ingestion of prohibited substances is a known risk. Our methodology is informed by established sports nutrition frameworks that weigh evidence, safety, and permitted use—and treat risk as a first-class constraint.

Risk & Evidence Matrix

← Higher riskLower risk →
↑ Stronger evidence · Weaker evidence ↓
N-of-1 Evaluation

Iterative evaluation: learning what works for one person

N-of-1 designs treat the individual as the unit of learning—well-suited to nutrition where responses vary. Reviews of N-of-1 approaches in nutrition discuss how repeated within-person measurement can inform personalized intervention decisions and how series of N-of-1 studies can be aggregated.

N-of-1 Logic

📊

Measure

Collect repeated within-person data across cycles

⚖️

Compare

Compare periods (baseline vs intervention) within the same individual

Decide

Keep what improved outcomes; remove what didn't

🔄

Repeat

Next cycle refines based on accumulated evidence

Iteration Log Template

Changed

Removed ashwagandha from evening protocol; increased magnesium glycinate from 200mg to 300mg.

Why

Ashwagandha showed no measurable improvement in sleep onset over 2 cycles. Magnesium showed dose-dependent improvement in sleep quality ratings.

Watchlist

Monitor GI tolerance at 300mg. If sleep quality plateaus, consider adding wind-down protocol support.

Adaptive intervention methods inform how to refine components under real-world conditions.

EMA Principles

Minimal check-ins: capture context without burden

EMA research emphasizes that user burden is a major driver of dropout and lower compliance in mobile health. Our methodology therefore uses ultra-short, targeted prompts designed to capture context that passive data cannot—avoiding redundant questions and long questionnaires.

Burden vs Adherence

94%

Estimated adherence rate

1–2 taps (trune™)12+ questions

Shorter prompts → better adherence → more reliable data

Redundant questions we avoid

How did you sleep?

Did you work out today?

How many steps?

Rate your mood (1-5)

Already inferred from wearable/device data

High-leverage prompts we ask

Travel today?

Late caffeine?

Unusual stressor?

Allergy symptoms?

Only what changes the decision

Transparency and limitations

Personalization is only credible when it is auditable. Each update is documented (what changed, why, what we're watching), and the methodology explicitly accounts for uncertainty, missingness, and variability in real-world behavior.

Transparency Card (Example)

Changed

Removed evening L-theanine; added magnesium glycinate 200mg

Why

No measurable improvement in calm ratings after 2 cycles; magnesium shows stronger signal for sleep onset

Watchlist

Monitor sleep onset latency and GI tolerance over next cycle

Known Limitations

trune™ is a wellness platform and is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent disease.