Corrections and missing evidence
The most useful message we receive is a specific one. If a review has stated something inaccurately about the shape of an evidence base, or omitted a body of work that would change a grade, tell us what it is and where it can be found.
A correction that changes the substance of a page will be made and recorded on the page. We do not require you to identify yourself, though an affiliation is useful context. It will be treated as context rather than as a reason to discount what you say.
Suggesting a claim for review
We grade claims, not substances, so the more precisely a suggestion is stated the more likely it is to become a review. A suggestion that names the claim, the population it concerns and the outcome asserted is far more useful than a compound name.
We prioritise claims that are being made publicly and commercially, where there is enough published human or preclinical evidence to appraise, and where a reader could plausibly be about to spend money or take a risk on the basis of it.
What we will not answer
We cannot answer questions about your own health, your medicines, your test results or what you should do. That is not caution for its own sake. A journal has no access to your history, no clinical relationship with you and no way to be accountable for the consequences. Those questions belong with your GP, your pharmacist or, in the United Kingdom, with NHS services.
We do not supply doses, protocols, schedules or sources for any compound, including those that are prescription only. We do not review named products or brands, accept product submissions, or take part in sponsored content, affiliate arrangements or link placement. Approaches of that kind are not answered.
Write to us
Use the form below. Say which page you are writing about if it concerns a specific review, and include a reference to the evidence you are pointing at if you are proposing a change.