Reviewer transparency
Reviewer credits, with no pretending
Pages here are not signed off by a clinician before they publish. That is not an oversight we are quietly working around: we restate published guidance and cite it, so the authority belongs to the source rather than to us, and every page names where its claims come from — you can verify us instead of trusting us. Where a volunteer clinician has reviewed a page, their name and credentials appear on it; where no name appears, no clinician has checked it. We are glad to have reviewers and are recruiting them, and we do not hold pages back waiting for one. Use this site to understand your situation and to ask better questions of the people treating you. We only show a medical review label when a named, credentialed reviewer has checked that exact page and the review metadata appears there.
What appears after a real review
When a qualified reviewer checks a page, the credit is shown on that page. A review credit is not a vague site-wide badge. It must include:
- Reviewer name and credentials
- Reviewer role or specialty
- Exact page reviewed
- Review date
- Conflict-of-interest note when applicable
Current reviewer queue
Our current high-risk queue starts with fever during treatment, blood clots, immunotherapy lung, bowel, liver, and hormone effects, diarrhea, rash, neuropathy, and treatment-by-stage pages. These topics are prioritized because wording can affect when someone calls their care team.
Who we are recruiting
We are looking for oncology nurses, physicians, pharmacists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, genetic counselors, rehabilitation clinicians, palliative-care clinicians, registered dietitians, social workers, translators, and trained patient advocates.
Related trust pages
Read our medical review policy, content review process, source methodology, and corrections process.