Eden Openly

Corrections

In brief

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:

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:

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 Where a piece is withdrawn, we leave an explanation in its place rather than deleting the page.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.

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.