Editorial Policy

Topic Selection Process

We choose topics from a few clear sources:

• Questions patients ask during consultations and follow-up visits
• Concerns we hear repeatedly in patient phone calls and intake conversations
• Updates to clinical guidelines from professional societies (Society for Vascular Surgery, American Heart Association, Society of Interventional Radiology, American College of Cardiology)
• New treatment options, devices, or procedural techniques in vascular and venous care
• FDA and CDC announcements that affect vascular patients
• Search behavior trends we see in patient inquiries
• Gaps in the existing patient-education content available online

Research Standards

Every clinical claim we publish is supported by a recognized source. The sources we rely on most often:

• Government health agencies: NIH, NHLBI, CDC, FDA, AHRQ
• Professional medical societies: Society for Vascular Surgery, American Heart Association, Society of Interventional Radiology, American College of Cardiology
• Peer-reviewed journals: Journal of Vascular Surgery, Circulation, JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine, and similar
• Established clinical guidelines and consensus statements
• Our own clinical experience treating thousands of vascular patients across Los Angeles and Southern California

When a statement reflects evolving evidence or differs across guidelines, we say so directly rather than oversimplifying.

Writing Process

Drafts are produced by our editorial team in close collaboration with our clinicians. Writers start from a patient question, research the current guidance, draft a plain-language explanation, then add the clinical nuance — when a treatment is indicated, who it is for, what the alternatives are, and what recovery actually looks like. We use real examples and avoid medical jargon unless we also define it. The goal is for a patient to finish an article feeling more informed about their options, not more confused.

Expert Review Process

Clinical content is reviewed by a licensed, board-certified physician on our team before publication. The reviewer checks the accuracy of clinical statements, the appropriateness of treatment descriptions, and whether the article reflects current standards of care. Articles that describe specific procedures, recovery, or outcomes are reviewed by a physician who personally performs those procedures.

When an article is reviewed, you will see a “Medically reviewed by [Physician Name, Credentials] on [Date]” line at the top.

Accuracy and Fact-Checking

Before publication, every article goes through a fact-checking pass that confirms:

• Citations link to the correct source and accurately reflect what that source says
• Statistics are current and pulled from primary sources, not aggregator sites
• Procedure descriptions, recovery timelines, and risk profiles match published clinical guidelines and our reviewer’s clinical experience
• Outdated references (e.g., superseded guideline versions, recalled devices, prior naming for organizations like CRD / DFEH) are caught and corrected
• No claim is included unless we can show where it came from

Updates and Corrections

Clinical guidelines change. Treatment standards evolve. We review older content on a regular schedule and update articles when guidelines shift, new evidence emerges, or our own clinical practice changes. When a substantive update is made, the article is reviewed by a physician again and the “Last updated” date is refreshed.

If you spot a factual error, an outdated citation, or a passage that does not read accurately, please contact us through the Contact or Patient Referral page. We review every correction request and respond. Corrections that change a clinical recommendation are noted at the top of the affected article.