Editorial policy

Separation of fact and opinion

Every vendor page separates two different kinds of statement. Structured attributes — pricing, contract terms, clinical staffing, integrations, evidence level — are statements of fact, sourced and dated, and we correct them promptly when wrong.

Summaries, verdicts, and watch-outs are clearly labeled opinion. They represent our editorial judgment applied to those facts. We welcome disagreement with them, and a vendor that disputes a verdict may have their response published alongside it.

Sourcing

Claims of fact are sourced to vendor documentation, published research, regulatory filings, or named buyer interviews. Where a claim rests on a single vendor's own assertion with no independent support, we say so and grade it accordingly on our evidence scale.

We do not publish pricing inferred from a competitor's quote or from market rumor. Pricing bands reflect what buyers have actually reported to us, and we state that they will differ from any individual quote.

Review and challenge

A named reviewer scores each vendor and records the rationale for every dimension. Any score that changes a vendor's overall rank is challenged by a second reviewer before publication.

Every vendor is re-reviewed at least annually, and immediately upon a material change in pricing, clinical model, ownership, or regulatory posture.

Corrections

Errors of fact are corrected as soon as they are verified. Material corrections are noted on the page with the date and a short description of what changed. We do not quietly edit and move on.

A disagreement about judgment is not a correction. Where a vendor believes our assessment is unfair rather than inaccurate, we will publish their response rather than change our view to accommodate it.

Use of AI

We use AI tools for research assistance, drafting support, and structuring data. Every published claim of fact is verified by a human reviewer against a primary source, and every score and verdict is set by a named human reviewer. No page is published on the strength of a model's output alone.

Not medical advice

This site is written for professionals evaluating vendors on behalf of a population. It is not medical advice, and it is not a substitute for clinical judgment or for your own legal and actuarial review. Individuals making decisions about their own treatment should speak with a qualified clinician.