Transparency
Medical Content Review Process
Every piece of medical content on this website is reviewed by a qualified physician before publication. This page explains who reviews our content, how the review works, and what standards we follow.
Our medical reviewer
Professor Cheng Wang
Chief Physician, Diabetic Foot Surgery
- Over 20 years of clinical experience in diabetic foot management
- Specialist in limb-salvage surgery, vascular reconstruction and wound healing
- Author of peer-reviewed publications on diabetic foot surgical outcomes
- Active practitioner at a tertiary teaching hospital in China
Professor Wang reviews all treatment descriptions, blog articles, educational pages and clinical claims published on this website. Content that falls outside diabetic foot surgery (such as general diabetes management or nutrition) is reviewed against published clinical guidelines.
What content is reviewed
- Treatment pages — descriptions of surgical and non-surgical procedures, expected outcomes, risks and recovery
- Blog articles — clinical education, condition guides, research summaries and patient-facing explanations
- Educational pages — wound classification systems, anatomy, risk assessment tools and symptom guides
- Landing pages — any page that makes or implies a medical claim about diabetic foot care
Coordination-only pages (about us, how it works, pricing, legal) are reviewed for factual accuracy but are not classified as medical content.
How the review works
Every piece of medical content goes through a four-step review before publication:
Clinical accuracy check
Every medical claim is compared against current peer-reviewed evidence. Outdated, ambiguous or unsupported statements are revised or removed.
Terminology and clarity
Medical terms are checked for correctness and explained in plain language. Content must be understandable to patients and families without a medical background.
Balanced perspective
Treatment descriptions include known limitations, risks, and alternatives. No procedure is presented as universally effective or guaranteed to succeed.
Source verification
References are traced to original publications. Citation details (authors, journal, year) are verified. Unreachable or retracted sources are replaced.
Evidence standards
Medical claims on this website must be supported by at least one of the following source types:
- Peer-reviewed journals indexed in PubMed and Cochrane Library
- Clinical practice guidelines from recognised medical societies (IWGDF, SVS, ADA)
- Published data from the Chinese National Health Commission and teaching hospital registries
- Textbook references for established surgical and wound-care techniques
We do not cite single case reports as evidence of treatment effectiveness. Anecdotal evidence and patient testimonials are clearly labelled as individual experiences and are not used to support clinical claims.
Content update policy
- Scheduled review: All medical content is reviewed at least every 12 months. The most recent review date is displayed on each page.
- Event-driven updates: Content is updated promptly when new clinical guidelines are published, when we receive a credible correction, or when referenced sources are retracted or superseded.
- Version transparency: Publication and last-updated dates are visible on all medical content pages.
Report a concern
If you believe any medical information on this website is inaccurate, outdated or misleading, please let us know. We take every report seriously and will review and correct verified issues promptly.