Eden Openly Editorial

Editorial Standards

The editorial standards that guide Eden Openly’s publishing, evidence handling, corrections, transparency and distinction between evidence, interpretation and opinion.

Purpose

Eden Openly publishes evidence-led material on transgender healthcare, clinical practice, ethics, law and public understanding. Our standards exist to make clear how we handle evidence, uncertainty, correction and editorial judgement.

Core principles

• Evidence before opinion. Claims about medicine, law or policy should be supported by appropriate sources.
• Transparency over certainty. Where evidence is incomplete, contested or indirect, we say so.
• Distinguish evidence from inference. Readers should be able to see what is directly evidenced and what is editorial interpretation.
• Corrections are part of credibility. Material errors should be corrected clearly and promptly.
• Patient dignity matters. Healthcare writing should not reduce people to arguments, case studies or abstractions.

Publication types

• Editorial Briefings — timely analysis of policy, law and public debate.
• Clinical Reviews — long-form clinical analysis.
• Evidence Notes — concise summaries of specific evidence questions.
• Evidence Reviews — full supporting reviews of the literature, methodology, limitations and references.

Evidence Notes and Evidence Reviews

Where possible, Eden Openly pairs concise Evidence Notes with fuller Evidence Reviews. This allows readers to move from a five-minute summary to the underlying analysis and primary literature.

Our aim is not to remove uncertainty from complex subjects. It is to describe uncertainty clearly enough that readers can reason with it.

Published standards

• Editorial Standards
  Current page

Corrections

Where factual errors are identified, Eden Openly will correct them transparently. Substantive corrections should be noted on the relevant page or article.