How We Work
Editorial Standards
WellnessInsider’s sourcing requirements, review process, and AI-assistance disclosure policy — the operational rules that govern every article we publish.
Sourcing Policy
The sourcing rules that apply to every health and wellness claim, regardless of topic, author, or format.
Primary over secondary
Articles must cite primary sources — peer-reviewed studies, clinical guidelines, regulatory statements — for every health claim. Secondary sources (other wellness media, news reports) may provide context but do not qualify as evidence.
Named, linkable sources only
Every source is linked to its canonical location: the PubMed abstract, the guideline PDF, the FDA communication page. We do not accept "according to research" without a specific citation. Paywalled sources are named and cited even when the full text is not publicly accessible.
Recency and relevance
For rapidly evolving topics we prioritise sources published within the last five years. Older foundational research is cited where it remains the primary evidence base, with clear attribution of its age and any subsequent updates to the scientific consensus.
Conflicts of interest
Industry-funded studies are cited with the funding source disclosed in the article. Where an industry-funded study is the only available evidence, we say so. We do not exclude industry-funded research categorically — we contextualise it honestly.
Review Process
The editorial and clinical review stages every article passes through before publication.
Author qualification
Every article is assigned to a named author. Authors writing on clinical or medical topics hold relevant credentials (RD, MD, PhD, or equivalent) or work under the direct supervision of a credentialed reviewer. AI-assisted drafts are reviewed by a human editor with subject-matter knowledge before entering the editorial queue.
Medical review
Articles containing health claims are reviewed by a medical or clinical professional before publication. The reviewer's name, credentials, and review date are displayed on the article. The reviewer may not be the same person as the author.
Evidence grading
Before an article can be approved, every health claim passes through our automated evidence validator. Claims receive an A–D grade based on the supporting sources attached to them. Any article with a D-grade claim (unattributed) is returned for revision and may not publish until the claim is sourced or removed.
Post-publication updates
Every article carries a visible last-updated date. When the underlying evidence changes — a meta-analysis updates, a guideline is revised, a product is recalled — the article is updated in place and the update is dated. Substantive factual corrections are logged on the public corrections page.
AI-Assistance Disclosure
How AI tools are used in our editorial workflow and how that use is disclosed to readers.
AI assistance is disclosed on the article
When AI tools are used to draft or substantially assist in writing an article, the byline carries a disclosure: "This article was drafted with AI assistance and reviewed by a human editor." The disclosure is visible to readers without requiring them to look for it.
AI does not replace human editorial judgement
AI-drafted content is never published without human review. The reviewer is responsible for verifying claims, checking sources, and ensuring the article meets the same evidence standards as entirely human-authored content. An AI-generated article that fails evidence grading is returned for revision, not auto-approved.
No fabricated experts
AI tools are not used to generate fictional author personas or reviewer credentials. Every named author and medical reviewer on this site is a real person whose credentials are verifiable. A fabricated expert byline is a categorical editorial failure.
AI tools used in production
We use AI tools at multiple stages of the content pipeline: to surface research signals, to draft article copy, and to assist in evidence structuring. We disclose this at the article level rather than treating it as a background operational detail.
Evidence Grading
The A–D rubric used to grade the evidence behind every health claim — the technical counterpart to these editorial standards.
Read Our Methodology