Editorial Policy

What this policy covers

This policy applies to educational articles, topic hubs, assessment explainers and care-navigation content published by DesperateMinds. Product logic, clinical screeners and provider listings have additional governance rules because the potential consequences of an error are higher.

Our goal is to publish content that helps a reader understand a question well enough to make their own next decision. We do not use fear, diagnostic certainty, fabricated expertise or unsupported promises to hold attention.

How a page is made

1. Intent audit. We check what the reader is trying to solve and whether an existing DesperateMinds page already owns that intent.
2. Source research. Material factual claims are mapped to suitable sources before the final copy is approved.
3. Drafting and editing. The page is written in plain language with direct answers, useful structure and limitations near the claims they qualify.
4. SEO and technical QA. Titles, metadata, canonical URLs, structured data, internal links, mobile behavior and indexation are checked without changing the meaning of the evidence.
5. Publication and maintenance. Meaningful updates receive a real modified date. Dates are not changed merely to make a page look fresh.

Authorship and accountability

Articles identify the person responsible for the content and link to background information where readers would reasonably expect it. A byline is not used as a substitute for evidence, and credentials are not stretched beyond their actual scope.

Clinical review is a separate status. We do not label a page “clinically reviewed” or “medically reviewed” unless a qualified reviewer actually reviewed that specific content and the review is documented. See the clinical review policy.

SEO, search intent and editorial independence

Keyword and search-intent research is required before new acquisition content is named or created. We prefer ordinary search language in titles and URLs when it accurately reflects the topic. A roadmap phrase is a topic brief, not an automatic title.

We do not create a new URL merely because another keyword variation exists. When an established page already answers the same intent, we prefer a careful expansion or internal link rather than publishing a competing page. Existing search-performing IQ articles receive especially conservative treatment.

SEO never authorizes a stronger health, validation or product claim than the evidence supports. Search volume also does not justify thin local-provider pages where DesperateMinds cannot provide real verified supply.

Updates, review triggers and dates

We revisit content when a source or guideline materially changes, when a product changes, when a reader reports a plausible error, when search data exposes an unanswered question, or when a scheduled quality audit identifies a gap. Time-sensitive facts are rechecked before they are repeated.

Minor spelling or formatting fixes do not need a new modified date. Substantive changes to the meaning, evidence, recommendations or product information do.

Commercial separation

Editorial content is not rewritten to favor a provider, partner or product because that party pays DesperateMinds. If a future article, placement or referral relationship is sponsored or commercially connected in a way that could affect how a reader interprets it, that relationship must be disclosed clearly near the relevant content.

Paid depth is allowed for appropriate non-clinical products, but core clinical safety information and basic clinical result interpretation are not paywalled.

Related policies

• Evidence standards and source policy
• Corrections policy
• AI use policy
• Provider ranking and sponsorship policy

External benchmark

Our public transparency approach is consistent with Google Search Central's guidance to make the who, how and why of content clear to readers. This link is a benchmark, not a claim of Google endorsement.