Content charter: News, Blog and Clinical Decisions
This site publishes three kinds of content, and they are deliberately not interchangeable. Each has its own URL prefix, its own page template, its own structured-data type and its own search intent. This charter is the rule we hold ourselves to.
Maintained by the StemCell Longevita editorial team ·
The three content types
| Type | Route | Search intent served | Template | Schema |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| News | /news/… | Knowing what changed — regulation, research results, clinic updates | Dateline, source links, no evergreen rewriting | NewsArticle |
| Blog | /blog/… | Understanding a condition, therapy or comparison before deciding | Explainer structure, evidence block, FAQ, reviewer byline | BlogPosting / MedicalWebPage |
| Clinical decisions | /clinical-decisions/… | Choosing between real options, including not treating | Question → options → who it suits → who it does not → next step | MedicalWebPage + FAQPage |
News
News covers what changed: a regulator's decision, a published trial, an accreditation, a change to our own practice. News pages carry a dateline and are never silently rewritten to stay evergreen — if the facts move, we publish a new item and link back.
- Answers the query: what happened, when, and does it affect me?
- Required: date, what changed, primary source link, why it matters for patients.
- Forbidden: undated claims, evergreen SEO padding, treatment recommendations.
Blog
Blog articles are explainers. They answer background questions about a condition, cell type or therapy for a reader who is researching, not yet deciding. Every article carries an author identity card, an evidence position, and a FAQ.
- Answers the query: what is this, how does it work, what does the evidence say?
- Required: reviewer byline with credentials and review date, evidence framing, sources.
- Forbidden: outcome percentages we cannot evidence, testimonial-led claims.
Clinical decisions
Clinical decision pages exist for one job: helping a patient and their doctor choose between concrete options. They are written as a question, then the options, then who each option suits and — explicitly — who it does not.
- Answers the query: which option applies to my situation, and should I proceed at all?
- Required: named alternatives including no treatment, candidacy limits, follow-up expectations.
- Forbidden: single-option framing, urgency language, anything implying a promised result.
Why they are kept apart
Mixing these types is the most common cause of thin, cannibalising medical content: a news item rewritten as an explainer competes with the explainer, and a decision page written like a blog post stops being usable at the point of decision. Separating routing, template and schema keeps one page per intent, makes the right page eligible for the right result type, and lets search engines and AI answer engines see what each page is for.
Related: editorial standards · how we evaluate evidence · conflict-of-interest disclosure.