Charles Guetti appeals the district court’s 1 judgment affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Following careful de novo review of the record and Guetti’s arguments for reversal, we defer to the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) credibility findings, which are supported by adequate reasons and substantial evidence, see Turpin v. Colvin, 750 F.3d 989, 993 (8th Cir. 2014); we conclude that the ALJ’s residual functional capacity assessment is supported by relevant, non-conclusory medical opinions and other evidence in the record, see Wildman v. Astrue, 596 F.3d 959, 964 (8th Cir. 2010); Tellez v. Barnhart, 403 F.3d 953, 956-57 (8th Cir. 2005); and we see no indication that the ALJ misapplied any regulations or guidelines in relying on the testimony of the vocational expert, which constituted substantial evidence to support the ALJ’s decision to deny benefits, see Buckner v. Astrue, 646 F.3d 549, 560-61 (8th Cir. 2011). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.