Clinical and domain review
Our review standards match the expertise to the subject, with particular attention to health claims, care options, and safety.
What receives review
Our standard calls for review appropriate to the subject and risk of support scripts, exclusions, contraindication notes, adverse-response language, professional-support routes, research syntheses, and health-related claims.
What reviewers assess
- Accuracy within the reviewer’s professional scope.
- Evidence strength, applicability, uncertainty, and disagreement.
- Potential contraindications, exclusions, and adverse responses.
- Whether language could be mistaken for diagnosis, treatment, or guaranteed benefit.
- When professional, medical, safety, or crisis support should be offered.
Limits of review
A reviewer does not evaluate an individual user, establish a professional relationship, guarantee safety or effectiveness, approve matters outside their scope, or endorse every company decision. Reviewer biographies, credentials, conflicts, dates, and scope will be displayed with content when review is required.
Identifying reviewed content
A page is described as clinically reviewed only when it identifies a qualified reviewer, the review date, and the exact content covered. Founder essays and personal reflections are identified by their authorship and purpose. A general policy page is not a clinical-review certification.