Skip to main content
THE TREATMENT REGISTRY
Patient journey

Editorial policy

We publish a directory, not a magazine. The rules below are the operating standards editorial follows on every entry — how we research a record, how we update it, how we cite, how we caution readers, how we handle conflicts, and how corrections move through the system.

Voice

Descriptive and quantified, never evaluative. Words like “leading”, “world-class”, “state-of-the-art”, “premium”, “elite”, “best”, “top” are banned when applied to a clinic, surgeon, country, or hospital. We describe what is, not how good it is. British English throughout.

How content is researched

Every record starts from primary sources — regulator and government registers, accreditation bodies’ own directories, national company registries, peer-reviewed publications with DOIs, recognised outcome registries, and the clinic’s own legally-accountable disclosures. Clinic marketing material is not a source. Patient testimony is not a source for facts about a clinic (it may inform a flag, but only when corroborated by primary evidence). Where a claim cannot be sourced to a primary record, it is either removed or marked // SOURCE NEEDED for editorial review.

How pages are updated

Every detail page carries two dates: when it was last edited and when its underlying claims were last verified against their sources. Clinic records are re-verified at least once every twelve months; flagged records are re-checked every six months; alerts (e.g. an accreditation expiry detected by the daily cron) trigger immediate review. Updates appear in the corrections log at /corrections.

What we publish

  • Verified clinic records with corporate registration, accreditations, and review summaries — each cited.
  • Sourced procedure information from peer-reviewed publications, recognised registries, and authoritative regulators.
  • Sourced country-level information on regulators, recourse, and visa.
  • Patient-utility tools whose logic is transparent and whose data is on the page.
  • The corrections log of every change to a published claim.

What we do not publish

  • Rankings, recommendations, or “best of” lists.
  • Diagnosis, prescription, treatment recommendations, or any other personalised medical advice.
  • Sponsored content. We do not accept payment for listings or referral commissions. See advertising policy.
  • Clinic-marketing photos presented as neutral facts.
  • AI-generated medical prose. All clinical text is editorial.
  • Patient reviews of named individual clinicians.
  • Before-and-after images.
  • Outcome claims without peer-reviewed publication or registry support.

Medical caution

Every page that touches eligibility, contraindications, risks, recovery, complications, or post-operative care carries the standard clinical-content disclaimer. The registry does not diagnose, does not prescribe, does not recommend, and does not establish a doctor–patient relationship. Complications require urgent assessment by a qualified clinician in person — see the medical disclaimer.

How conflicts are handled

Inclusion in the registry is editorial — clinics cannot buy in, and no paid placement is accepted on tiers, search results, or facets. Where a guide or analysis is funded by an external party, the funder is named at the top of that page along with the scope of the engagement. Author-level relationships are declared in /team. Full policy at /advertising-policy.

How corrections are processed

Anyone may submit a correction — patients, clinics, regulators, professionals, or the general public — via the form at /corrections or via the “Submit information” button on a clinic page. We acknowledge receipt, investigate against primary sources, and either update the record or publish a response with the reasoning. We do not remove factual public-interest information in exchange for payment. Every change is logged with a date, a source, and an editor handle.

What counts as a source

See /methodology/sources for the per-claim-type rules. Briefly: regulator and government registries, peer-reviewed journals (with DOI), recognised national outcome registries, and the clinic’s own legally-accountable disclosures (e.g. companies-house filings, mandatory regulator notifications).

What counts as verification

See /methodology/tiers for the verification-tier rules. Briefly: every Tier-1 / Tier-2 / Tier-3 claim is paired to one or more entries in the registry-wide source list. The verification log on each clinic records who checked what, against which source, and with what result. Verified does not mean recommended, risk-free, medically appropriate, or outcome-guaranteed.

Date-reviewed standard

Every clinical-content page renders both a last edited and a last verified date. Pages older than twelve months without re-verification are surfaced in the freshness index at /freshness.