Fact-Checking Policy

Health misinformation has real-world consequences. A reader who acts on inaccurate blood pressure thresholds, wrong vaccination schedules, or misleading insurance claim procedures can experience harm — physical, financial, or both. Fact-checking is not a formality for us; it is a moral obligation given the topics we cover.

This policy applies to every article that makes a factual claim about human health, disease, treatment, nutrition, insurance regulation, or government health programs. It does not apply to opinion pieces (clearly labeled as such) or to product release notes.

Every article is checked for the following claim types:

• Medical claims: Disease symptoms, diagnostic thresholds (e.g., BP ranges for hypertension), treatment efficacy, drug dosages and side effects, vaccine schedules.
• Statistical claims: Any number — prevalence rates, mortality rates, claim approval percentages, premium averages. Each must trace to a published source less than 5 years old (or noted as historical).
• Regulatory claims: Statements about what IRDAI, CDSCO, MoHFW, or other regulators require or permit.
• Quotations: Direct quotes from doctors, researchers, or officials — verified against the original source (interview recording, published paper, official statement).
• Definitions: Technical terms defined in the article — checked against a medical dictionary or the cited source.

When verifying a claim, we consult sources in the following priority order. Lower-priority sources are only used when higher-priority ones are unavailable for the specific claim.

1. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in peer-reviewed journals (e.g., Cochrane Reviews).
2. Original peer-reviewed research published in reputable medical journals (e.g., The Lancet, NEJM, BMJ, JAMA).
3. Clinical practice guidelines from recognized bodies (WHO, American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association, Indian Hypertension Guidelines, NICE).
4. Government health agencies (Indian Council of Medical Research, AIIMS, MoHFW, CDC, NHS, FDA).
5. Regulatory bodies (IRDAI for insurance, CDSCO for medical devices and drugs).
6. Primary statistical sources (NFHS, Census of India, National Health Accounts).
7. Reputable secondary reporting — only when the underlying primary source is inaccessible. We cite the secondary source but note the primary.

We do not accept as primary sources: social media posts, unverified news articles, blogs without citation, press releases from companies with a financial interest in the claim, or AI-generated content.

Each article moves through these verification steps:

1. Claim extraction: The fact-checker reads the draft and lists every factual claim (numbers, thresholds, definitions, regulatory statements).
2. Source matching: For each claim, the fact-checker identifies the best available source per the source hierarchy above.
3. Direct verification: The fact-checker opens the cited source (not a summary of it) and confirms the claim matches the source's actual content — not just the title or abstract.
4. Recency check: For clinical guidance, the source should be from the last 5 years (or be the current standard, whichever is newer). If a newer standard exists, the article must reflect it.
5. Conflict check: If multiple authoritative sources disagree (e.g., WHO vs. AHA on a threshold), the article acknowledges the discrepancy and explains which we follow and why.
6. Citation insertion: Verified claims are linked inline to their source. Sources are listed at the bottom of the article.
7. Editor sign-off: An editor reviews the fact-checker's notes and approves publication. The fact-checker's name and review date are recorded internally.

Sometimes, reputable sources disagree — for example, Indian hypertension guidelines may differ slightly from WHO guidelines on BP thresholds. In such cases:

• We default to the guideline most applicable to the Indian context (e.g., Indian guidelines over European guidelines for an article primarily for Indian readers).
• We acknowledge the discrepancy in the article text ("Different guidelines use slightly different thresholds; we follow the X guidelines because...").
• We link to both sources so the reader can review them.

We never present a single contested source as definitive.

Articles that describe diseases, treatments, diagnostic criteria, or drug information undergo an additional medical review by a licensed healthcare professional (MBBS or higher). The medical reviewer verifies that the content is clinically accurate and does not contain dangerous advice. The reviewer's name, credentials, and review date are noted at the bottom of the article ("Medically reviewed by Dr. X, MBBS, MD on [date]").

Medical reviewers are not employed by VitalNadi and do not have financial conflicts of interest with the article's topic. They review as independent professionals.

Published articles are re-reviewed at least every 12 months. Articles on rapidly-evolving topics (e.g., COVID-19 guidelines, new drug approvals, IRDAI regulatory changes) are re-reviewed more frequently — typically every 3-6 months.

When new clinical guidance is published that affects an existing article (e.g., updated hypertension thresholds), we update the article within 30 days and add an editor's note explaining the change. The "Last reviewed" date is updated accordingly.

If a reader reports a potential error via comments or our contact form, the report is logged and routed to the fact-checker within 5 business days. If the report identifies a genuine error, we correct it within 5 additional business days and add a correction notice at the bottom of the article. If the report is unfounded (the article is accurate as written), we explain why to the reader.

Readers can report errors via our contact page with the subject "Fact-Check Report".

For transparency, here is what is exempt from this fact-checking process:

• Opinion pieces: Clearly labeled as "Opinion" or "Editorial" — these represent the author's viewpoint, not established fact.
• Personal stories: First-person accounts of health experiences — these are the author's lived experience and not subject to verification.
• App release notes: Descriptions of VitalNadi app features and updates — these are factual descriptions of our own product, not external claims.
• Predictions: Forward-looking statements clearly labeled as predictions or forecasts.

Even for these categories, we do not publish content we know to be false or misleading.

Every health article on VitalNadi displays:

• The author's name and credentials (where applicable).
• The medical reviewer's name and credentials (for clinical content).
• The original publication date.
• The "Last reviewed" date.
• A list of sources cited in the article.
• A correction history (if any corrections have been made).

This metadata is displayed at the top and bottom of each article so readers can assess the article's currency and credibility at a glance.

To report a factual error or ask about our fact-checking process, contact us with the subject "Fact-Check".