CancerGroup.com Editorial Review Policy

Review during the editorial process

Editorial content (reviews, clinical trials, news stories, disease summaries) is chosen based on research that has either appeared in peer-reviewed journals or passed a scientific review process before presentation at a medical conference. If questions persist about the quality of the data or the relevance of the story, editorial advisors are consulted. Based on the input from our editorial advisors, either the reporting process begins or the story is dropped. During the reporting process, comment from a source not affiliated with the primary researchers is required for inclusion in the story to provide an unbiased perspective.

Editorial review upon challenge of content accuracy

In the event a primary source (person mentioned or quoted in story) or third party informs CancerGroup.com staff of a factual error in any content already posted (i.e. misquote, typo, data from study reproduced incorrectly), an editor or senior reporting staff will confirm the error and correct the misprint. In the event a third party disagrees with interpretation of data that appear in our reviews, or takes issue with views expressed by individuals in a story, or other issues that do not involve errors of fact, the third party will be encouraged to write a letter-to-the-editor, which will be reviewed by CancerGroup.com editorial staff and possibly be posted on the site to express divergent views than those appearing in a particular story. In the event a third party takes issue with the medical accuracy of material appearing in a story, disease summary or other editorial content, at least one editorial advisor with expertise in the particular field in question will be consulted. If, based on input from our editorial advisory board, the information is deemed inaccurate or misleading, the material will be corrected by CancerGroup.com staff promptly.