Editorial Standards & Content Policy
Reliable health information should be accurate, balanced, and honest about what is known and what is still being studied. This page explains how we create and maintain the content on this website.
Evidence and editorial policy
Every medical page on this site is built from a central evidence database. This section explains how that database is compiled, who checks it, and how often it changes.
How sources are selected
We rank sources in a fixed order: systematic reviews and meta-analyses first, then randomised controlled trials, then regulatory documents (FDA, EMA, MHRA, Türkiye Ministry of Health), then professional-society guidance such as the ISSCR. Uncontrolled case series, conference abstracts, preprints and company materials are used only to describe what is being studied, never to support a claim of benefit. Where a page links to evidence, it links to a reproducible search of PubMed or ClinicalTrials.gov, or to the primary regulator page, so a reader can check the current literature rather than a selected extract. Publication dates are shown wherever a specific document is cited.
How we classify evidence
Each condition page states, separately, whether there is mechanism (laboratory) evidence, animal or preclinical evidence, early human evidence, controlled human evidence, and regulatory approval. These are never merged. Laboratory or animal findings are never described as if they were clinical results, and a treatment being lawfully available in a given country is never described as proof that it works.
Who reviews content
Medical content is reviewed by Prof. Dr. Erdal Karaöz, Professor of Histology and Embryology and our medical reviewer, whose credentials, affiliations and publication record are published on this site. Reviewer names and review dates appear on the pages they cover; we do not publish anonymous 'medical team' bylines on clinical content.
When pages are updated
Every condition page shows an 'Evidence last reviewed' date and a 'Next scheduled review' date. High-risk pages — those covering serious or progressive conditions, or conditions where the evidence is weakest — are reviewed at least every six months. All other medical pages are reviewed at least annually. Pages are also reviewed out of cycle when a major trial reports, when a regulator issues a decision or warning, or when a reader tells us something is wrong.
Corrections
If you believe a statement on this site is inaccurate, out of date or overstated, contact us and tell us which page and which sentence. We record the correction, update the page, and move its review date forward. Substantive corrections are reflected in the page's review date.
Conflicts of interest
StemCell Longevita is an international patient coordination platform and has a commercial interest in the treatments described on this site. We state that plainly rather than presenting ourselves as a neutral source. To limit the effect of that interest: evidence ratings are written from the source hierarchy above and are not allowed to be softened for commercial reasons; pages state where evidence is weak, absent or negative, including where trials have failed; we do not publish patient outcomes, success rates or testimonials that we cannot evidence; we do not pay for editorial coverage or for reviews; and our medical reviewer's academic affiliations and roles are disclosed on his profile page. Where a treatment is available only inside a research or exceptional-use framework, the page says so instead of implying routine approval.
Medical Review
Health content is reviewed with input from qualified medical professionals to help ensure it is accurate, balanced, and appropriately cautious.
Evidence-Aware Sourcing
We aim to reflect current scientific understanding, drawing on reputable clinical and academic sources, and we distinguish established practice from areas of ongoing research.
Balanced & Honest
We do not promise cures or guaranteed outcomes. Benefits, uncertainties, and limitations are presented so readers can make informed decisions.
Clear Medical Disclaimers
Educational content is clearly identified as such. It is not a substitute for a consultation with a qualified physician who knows your individual situation.
Regular Review & Updates
Medical knowledge evolves. We review and update content periodically so information stays as current and relevant as possible.
Corrections & Feedback
If you believe something is inaccurate or unclear, you can contact us. We take corrections seriously and update content where warranted.
Our Commitment to Readers
StemCell Longevita is an international patient coordination platform. Our content is intended to help patients and families understand regenerative and cell-based therapies so they can have informed conversations with qualified physicians.
We are careful to distinguish between treatments that are well established and those that remain subjects of active scientific research. Where evidence is still developing, we say so. We do not use fabricated statistics, and we avoid language that promises specific results.
All health content on this site is for general educational purposes and does not replace individualized medical advice. Decisions about treatment should always be made together with a licensed medical professional who is familiar with your personal medical history.
Related clinical questions
Where this page sits in the wider picture.
What the evidence says
The rest of our policy cluster
Method and disclosure are published as separate, linkable documents so an article can cite the exact one it relies on.
Editorial standards
Who writes, who reviews, how often pages change and how corrections are handled.
How we evaluate evidence
The source hierarchy and the five-part rating shown on every condition page.
Conflict-of-interest disclosure
Our commercial interests, stated plainly, and the rules that limit them.