Editorial policy.
- 01
Commissioning
Articles are commissioned by the editor with input from peer advisors. Authors disclose any conflicts of interest before commissioning. Anyone with a financial stake in a treatment provider is automatically disqualified from writing about it.
- 02
Clinical review
Every article in the harm-reduction, pro-guidance and updates categories is reviewed by a clinician with relevant qualifications before publication. Reviewers are listed on the article. Stories may be co-authored by clinicians but are not required to carry a clinical sign-off.
- 03
Sources
Every clinical claim is sourced. Where evidence is uncertain, we say so plainly. We prefer peer-reviewed sources, then NHS / DoH guidance, then primary regulatory documents. We avoid newspaper coverage as a source for clinical claims.
- 04
Re-review
Articles are re-reviewed every 12 months. The reviewedAt timestamp is visible on every article. If you spot something out of date, the contact form goes straight to the editor.
- 05
Corrections
Substantive corrections are noted at the bottom of the article with a date. Typos are fixed silently. Significant rewrites trigger a fresh review.
- 06
Independence
We do not accept advertising. We do not accept sponsorship from treatment providers. We do not accept grants from organisations with a stake in the substances we cover.