Editorial
Every Preventio Hub article is built from a verified literature base, challenged against independent counter-evidence searches, and revisited in periodic citation audits. This page collects the working documents that back that process — so readers can see exactly what was reviewed, where the gaps are, and how errors are corrected when they surface.
Editorial workbench
-
Literature reviewed
The peer-reviewed studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses Preventio Hub indexed during article preparation. Each entry lists study type, sample size, key findings, and any disclosed funding or conflict of interest — including studies with null results, industry funding, or findings that diverge from current clinical marketing.
-
Counter-evidence search
An independent PubMed search for evidence that contradicts or complicates claims made by dominant prophylaxis brands. Where manufacturer-favorable studies are cited, Preventio Hub searches for the strongest opposing or null-result literature. Published gaps are reported honestly — including where competitor brands have produced little or no independent clinical evidence.
-
Q2 2026 citation audit
A line-by-line audit of the citations used across 14 previously published Preventio Hub articles. This document lists the issues identified, their severity, the corrections applied, and the patterns observed across the site. Publishing the audit — not just the corrections — is part of the editorial standard.
Editorial standards
Preventio Hub follows a set of rules that apply to every article before it is published and that continue to apply after publication:
- Every cited study is verified on PubMed or the publisher's website before an article goes live. Authors, year, journal, sample size, and reported findings must match the real paper. Citations that cannot be verified are removed.
- No invented numbers, specs, or dates. If a product specification, price, launch year, or clinical figure is not publicly disclosed, the article says so. Honest gaps are preferred over fabricated precision.
- Brands are listed alphabetically across all articles, guides, and directories. No manufacturer receives preferential positioning.
- Counter-evidence is sought out, not buried. When a study favorable to one product is cited, the strongest opposing or null-result study from an independent PubMed search is searched for and, where available, included. When counter-evidence does not exist in the published literature, that absence is itself reported.
- Funding and conflicts of interest are disclosed when known — including in Preventio Hub's own literature index.
- Corrections are published. When an error is identified in a live article, the article is corrected and the change is logged. Audit documents like this one remain public for readers who want to trace what changed and why.
How errors are corrected
Readers who find a factual error — a misquoted study, a wrong specification, a citation without a corresponding paper — are invited to write to editorial@preventiohub.com. Corrections are applied to the live article, the modification date is updated, and — where the correction is substantial — it is logged in the next citation audit.
Last updated: April 16, 2026