Editorial standards for useful, transparent skin care information

Authorship and editorial accountability

Pages are published under the DermaScanAI Editorial Team when the work is produced and maintained collectively. The team is accountable for matching product descriptions to implemented features, keeping claims proportionate and distinguishing education from medical advice.

We do not attach a clinician's name, credentials or review claim unless that identifiable professional has actually reviewed the final page and agreed to be credited.

• Product claims are checked against the current app flow.
• Health statements are phrased as general education.
• Diagnosis, treatment and guaranteed-result language is prohibited.
• Sources and update dates remain visible to readers.

How AI may assist the editorial process

AI tools may support outlining, language review, consistency checks and detection of missing safety context. AI output is not treated as a source and is not published solely because it sounds plausible.

A human editor remains responsible for verifying claims, checking links, removing unsupported certainty and ensuring that each language reads naturally rather than as a mechanical translation.

• AI does not confer medical expertise.
• Generated citations are checked against the real source.
• Locale text is reviewed for meaning, tone and search intent.
• Sensitive or high-impact claims receive additional scrutiny.

Source selection and fact checking

For health concepts, we prefer public guidance from recognized medical bodies, regulators, primary research and established clinical references. For service behavior, we use current DermaScanAI product, privacy and terms information.

Editors read the linked material, check that it directly supports the claim and avoid stretching a source beyond its scope. We do not use an app result, social post or marketing claim as evidence of medical effectiveness.

• Authority and direct relevance matter more than the number of links.
• Regulatory information is identified by jurisdiction.
• Limitations and uncertainty are retained.
• Conflicting or evolving evidence is described rather than hidden.

Medical review is explicit, never implied

A page without a named reviewer is editorial content that has not been presented as clinician-reviewed. General safety language and authoritative sources do not turn it into personalized medical advice.

If medical review is added, the page will identify the reviewer, relevant credentials where appropriate and review date. The reviewer field will not be populated with a fictional person or a generic title.

Corrections, feedback and meaningful dates

Readers can report an error through the contact page. We assess the cited passage, underlying source and affected language versions. Material errors are corrected promptly; connected pages are checked when the issue may repeat elsewhere.

The published date marks first release. The modified date changes only after a meaningful editorial or factual update, not a cosmetic build. A last-reviewed date is shown only when a documented review occurred.

• Broken links and outdated product steps are maintenance issues.
• Safety errors receive priority.
• Translations are corrected in their own editorial context.
• A changed date must correspond to changed content or a recorded review.