About
Medical review process
What happens between an article being drafted and it being published.
Who reviews
We are establishing a named clinical review panel of AHPRA-registered practitioners with experience in co-occurring ADHD and Autism in adults. Reviewer names and verifiable registration details will be published on this page once that panel is confirmed. Until then, content is edited for clarity and factual accuracy by our editorial team, and we do not attribute clinical sign-off to any named individual we cannot verify.
The review path
- Draft. A writer (sometimes a clinician, sometimes a community member, sometimes the editorial team) drafts the article from research notes and the editorial brief.
- Internal edit. An editor checks structure, plain-language, accuracy of factual claims, and ensures every clinical statement has a citation.
- Clinical review. The reviewer reads the full article, comments on accuracy, suggests corrections, and signs off explicitly. We do not publish without their sign-off in writing.
- Compliance check. We check the article for: presence of crisis support block on sensitive topics, correct attribution of every clinical claim, no diagnostic language outside the diagnosis pillar, and Australian crisis line presence on every state-specific page.
- Publish. The article is dated last reviewed on the day of clinical sign-off and scheduled for next review twelve months out.
Re-review
Every clinical article re-enters the review queue 30 days before its next review date. The reviewer can choose to: re-confirm without changes (and bump the dates forward), revise (small corrections, dates bumped forward), or trigger a rewrite (significant evidence change). Articles that fall past their next-review date are flagged in the editorial dashboard and may be temporarily noindexed if the delay exceeds 60 days.
Sensitive content
Articles touching on suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, or substance use receive an additional safety review against Mindframe guidelines before publication. The crisis support block is non-negotiable on these articles, and our schema validator blocks publish if it is missing.
Disagreements
If an editorial decision conflicts with the reviewer’s clinical view, the reviewer’s view prevails. We would rather publish later than publish something the reviewer is uncomfortable with.