Mechanism Diligence

Draft review / Editorial policy

Editorial policy — Draft for review

AI-assisted draft, not yet reviewed

Draft policy for founder review. Unresolved fields remain marked; this is not a statement of current practice.

Aim and owner

We explain medicines and the evidence behind them. Each of our ten views serves a different reader need. It does not choose a treatment for the reader. Editor: [FOUNDER TO SUPPLY: name and role]. This is our proposed process. It does not certify older pages.

Sources

We start with the current label for the exact product. We check Drugs@FDA for approval questions or conflicting label versions. Guidelines give clinical context. Trials show measured benefits and harms. Reviews bring studies together. Studies in cells or animals help explain mechanisms. They do not prove a patient benefit.

Every factual claim needs a source that supports it. We record the section, version, identifier and date checked. Established, Probable and Uncertain tags show differences in evidence. We state what remains unknown and what could resolve it.

Writing

Explain the target, tissue and effect. Patient and Caregiver text targets grades 6–8. General text targets grades 8–10. We use Flesch–Kincaid to estimate grades. Technical views use needed terms and explain short forms. Plain-language edits must keep every fact and number.

We propose a CDC Clear Communication Index target of 90 or more. PEMAT targets are at least 70% for both ease of understanding and ease of use. These are goals, not scores already earned. [VERIFY: instrument versions and human scoring]. Reading scores do not prove understanding.

Review and updates

Source checks come before review by a qualified outside expert. We record the exact version and scope. Proposed targets: full review every 12 months; check label changes within 30 days; check safety notices within 7 days. Urgent errors use the faster corrections process. [FOUNDER TO SUPPLY: owner and staff to meet these targets]. No automatic monitor is in place through this plan.

Keep a change log and new version for edits that change meaning. Dates for release, update, source check and review stay separate. New medical text needs new review.

Independence, visuals and feedback

Funders cannot control conclusions. See Funding. Visuals name real structures and species. They explain where scale, timing or motion is schematic. Text, scripts and visuals all need review. Keep captions, text options and motion controls. Send reports through Corrections. We need a defined study and results before claiming better learning. [VERIFY: link actual protocol and results if completed].