Editorial
Page contents
How we create app content
We have a dedicated project and editorial team creating the content for each app. The teams include people with lived experience, health and topic experts, and representatives from our trusted development partners.
We ask people involved in creating content to declare conflicts of interest.
The Lead Editor and Clinical Safety Officer is Dr Knut Schroeder.
Editorial aims
We want to ensure that apps are:
- accurate
- clear
- evidence-informed
This means content is based on the best available scientific knowledge, where available.
Sufficiently qualified and experienced health professionals and specialist topic experts check and approve apps before launch and major updates.
Quality principles
Expert Self Care is certified by the Patient Information Forum 'PIF Tick', the only independently assessed quality mark for print and digital health information. This means we create content according to accepted quality principles, including:
- Process: We create information using a consistent and documented process.
- Training: We train and support people to produce high-quality information.
- Need: Our information meets an identified consumer need.
- Evidence: We base information on reliable, up-to-date evidence.
- User involvement: We involve patients and public contributors in the development of health information.
- Clear language: We write information in plain English.
- Ease of use: We create apps that are easy to use and navigate.
- Feedback: We enable and encourage users to give feedback on the information.
- Promotion: We promote information to make sure it reaches those who need it.
- Impact: We measure the impact of information.
Writing objectives
When creating content, we aim to achieve the following:
- Accuracy: We ensure that information is based on the best available evidence, accurate, balanced and transparent. We make it clear where content draws on opinion or incomplete information.
- Impartiality: We promise to be objective and impartial when presenting information, and clearly state where significant views differ, or where there is no clear scientific consensus.
- Accountability: We're accountable for our content and will deal fairly with feedback and criticism. We encourage user feedback and embrace a culture of learning. We are transparent in the way we produce, edit and review information.
- Taste and decency: All our content is suitable for a general audience within a given age range. We do not include anything that people may reasonably find offensive.
- Privacy: We do not disclose any personal information without people's explicit prior consent. For details please refer to our privacy policy.
We are funded through customisation licenses for our apps and by taking commissions for 'own-brand' apps for external organisations. We will always be transparent about external funding, commercial partnerships, or sponsorship arrangements and declare conflicts of interest publicly.
Editorial standards
We are dedicated to creating accurate, balanced and transparent information.
- Transparency: We ask external team members, contributors and advisers to disclose any relevant financial or other interests that may affect any information produced by us.
- Conflicts of interest: Where conflicts of interest exist, we discuss with the team and, if necessary, consult with independent external advisers on how to manage these.
- Quality assurance: Our core writers and editors are trained in critical appraisal. Overall responsibility for all our content lies with our Clinical Editor and Clinical Safety Officer (currently Knut Schroeder).
In addition, we build our apps in line with the 'Evidence standards framework for digital health technologies' published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
How we develop content
We develop our content in repeated (iterative) cycles. This process involves several steps.
- Research: We base the information on our apps on peer-reviewed scientific research and the direct experience of clinicians, topic experts, other health professionals, national charities, patients and other relevant groups. Our sources include the NHS Knowledge and Library Hub National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Clinical Knowledge Summaries as well as trusted journals and databases.
- Information Production: Once we've researched a topic, a senior member of our editorial team drafts and edits new content in collaboration with other team members. We use an internal style guide for reference and take an iterative approach when developing content. The text undergoes review by the wider project team and external advisers who check for accuracy, balance, accessibility, tone, relevance and appropriateness.
- Sign-off: Before launch and update releases, apps undergo clinical and editorial sign-off by senior members of the internal and external editorial teams — supplemented by further review and sign-off by outside experts as appropriate.
- Final check: At every stage of the process and before publication, we check content for errors, spelling, grammar, adherence to our style guide and overall presentation.
- Review: We review the content on our apps at least every 3 years and display the dates of the last check and the next planned review. In areas where clinical knowledge changes quickly, we review the content yearly — or more frequently if required.
- Content in development: When testing information with representatives of our intended audience, we clarify that content is under development and not the final product.
While we will always try to adhere to our editorial standards, the editorial process does not cover opinion pieces and personal blog posts published on our website.
How we invite feedback
We invite and welcome comments and feedback on our content.
- Feedback and comments: Apps have a feedback page or button linking to an anonymous feedback questionnaire.
- Contact: We encourage feedback by email and other means and provide contact details within apps.
- Complaints: We take complaints seriously and deal with these at senior editorial team level, using an internal complaints procedure.
We manage and address feedback in line with our feedback protocol and:
- invite feedback at given opportunities
- offer various routes to giving feedback (both in-person and anonymous)
- log feedback
- decide on which action to take (which might include wider team review and consultation with experts)
- document actions taken
We audit feedback logs at least once every 12 months and make them available on request (excluding confidential information).
Find out more
For comments and feedback on how we develop content and for further details, please contact us.
Page last reviewed: 30 May 2024