In brief
- We correct openly. When we get something wrong, we say so plainly and put it right rather than quietly deleting it.
- We distinguish corrections, clarifications, updates and retractions — each is handled and marked differently.
- To request a correction, reach the editor through our Editorial Contact page. We read every message.
Accuracy matters more than pride. Everything we publish is researched and checked before it goes out, but no publication is immune to error — and in subjects that touch health, law and people’s lives, getting it right matters more than most. When we get something wrong, we want to know, and we want to fix it in the open.
Our approach
We treat a correction as part of doing the work properly, not an embarrassment to be managed. If a reader, a source or a reviewer shows us that something we have published is inaccurate, we will look into it; and where we are wrong, we will say so and put it right. We do not quietly delete mistakes or pretend they did not happen.
What we correct
Not every change is the same kind of change, so we name them:
- Correction — a factual error in something we published. We fix it and mark the piece with a dated note describing what changed.
- Clarification — text that was accurate but open to being misread. We reword it, and note the change where it affects meaning.
- Update — new information or evidence that post-dates publication. We revise the piece and date the change.
- Retraction — a piece whose central claim cannot be supported. We withdraw it and leave an explanation in its place rather than removing the page. This is rare.
Minor fixes — typographical errors, broken links, formatting — are made without a note.
Evidence that changes over time
Much of what we publish, particularly our Clinical Reviews, is written to last beyond the news cycle, in fields where the evidence itself moves. A review that was accurate when published can be overtaken by new research. We treat this as an update rather than an error: we revise the piece, date the change, and where it matters we note what changed and why. This is a feature of evidence-led writing, not a failure of it.
How to request a correction
If you believe something we have published is inaccurate or misleading, please tell us. You can reach the editor through our Editorial Contact page. We read every message.
To help us act quickly, please include:
- the title or link of the piece;
- the specific passage or claim in question;
- what you believe is inaccurate; and
- a source we can check against, if you have one.
What happens next
We aim to acknowledge correction requests within five working days. We review the point against the original sources, consult a reviewer where the question is technical, and respond with what we have decided and why. Substantive corrections — those that affect the meaning or reliability of a piece — are prioritised. If we conclude that no change is needed, we will explain that too.
How corrections are recorded
When we make a substantive correction, clarification or update, we mark it on the piece with a short dated note describing what changed. Minor fixes are made silently. Where a piece is withdrawn, we leave an explanation in its place rather than deleting the page. Our aim is that the record of what we got wrong, and how we put it right, stays visible.
Corrections to our own work are also entered in the Evidence Transmission Register, which records errors found in published documents — other organisations’ and our own — in a single list on the same terms. Our own entries carry the same styling, the same fields and the same wording as everyone else’s, and they are not grouped apart to be read separately.
What we don’t change
We do not change a piece simply because a conclusion is unpopular, uncomfortable or contested. We distinguish between a factual error, a disagreement, a matter of interpretation and evolving evidence — and only the first is a correction. Our responsibility is to accuracy, to transparency, and to the integrity of the reasoning, not to the comfort of any conclusion.
Good correction is not damage control. It is part of what makes a publication worth trusting — and it is the same standard we ask of the evidence we cite.
Changes to this page
30 September 2026 — Noted, under “How corrections are recorded”, that corrections to our own work are entered in the Evidence Transmission Register alongside errors found in other organisations’ documents.
27 September 2026 — Added the “What we don’t change” section, consolidating our earlier Corrections & Updates note into this page.