ABOUT THE SITE

Editorial standards

Source provenance, health-claim checks, rights review, correction history and transparent use of AI.

An editor checking an open reference book with a pencil

Before publication

Editorial content needs a clear purpose, source support, useful context and appropriate rights. Checks cover factual claims, dates, medical language, duplication, copyright, links and technical readiness. A visually complete page is not sufficient evidence that its content is ready.

Health information

We distinguish source reporting from our explanations. High-impact claims, conflicting evidence and personal medical recommendations require additional scrutiny. The website does not invent statistics, professional qualifications, author identities or claims of clinical review.

AI assistance

AI may support research, drafting and quality checks. This is disclosed. Automated assistance is not represented as review by a doctor or another human professional. The original source and any unresolved limits should remain visible to the reader.

Changes after publication

Substantive changes need an explanation and an appropriate change date. Cosmetic changes and scheduled checks must not make old reporting look new. Corrections preserve an audit record. Historical content is kept in context, and unsupported precision should not be presented as established fact.

Images and video

We use original AI-created editorial media where appropriate. Historical scenes are reconstructions; conceptual photographs do not document an actual patient, agency, laboratory result or outbreak event. Media must fit the article, avoid misleading scientific detail and be checked for visual errors. Images and video are served locally without photo-credit referral links. Required source-text and dataset attribution is retained separately.