How We Review Skincare Information
This is the practical standard behind the "sources" field every article's content schema supports. It applies before an article's status can move from draft to published.
The sourcing standard
- Specific physiological or mechanism claims need a real, checkable source. Statements like "the nose has a different oil gland pattern than the rest of the face" or "L-ascorbic acid needs a low pH to remain stable" link to a peer-reviewed study, a clinical review, or a comparably credible reference, not to another skincare blog restating the same claim without its own source.
- General, well-established knowledge doesn't need a citation for every sentence — "cleanse before you moisturize" doesn't need a footnote. The bar is for claims a reader couldn't verify themselves and that would change the article's advice if wrong.
- We prefer primary or near-primary sources — a journal article, a systematic review, a clinical database — over secondary blog posts, even well-written ones, when a primary source exists and is findable.
- If we can't find a credible source for a specific claim, we don't publish the claim. We either soften it to what's actually supported, or cut it.
- Every source is a real, working link at time of publication. Sources are periodically checked and updated if a link goes dead or the underlying research is superseded.
What "reviewed" means on this site
Where an article's byline includes a reviewer, that means a second pass specifically checking the article's factual claims against its cited sources, not just an editorial read for tone and clarity. Articles without a named reviewer have still gone through the sourcing standard above during writing.
Where this standard doesn't fully apply yet
Some of the earliest sample articles on this site, built to prove out the site's technical structure rather than serve as finished content, were written before this standard existed and are being brought up to it. If you find one that doesn't yet meet it, that's expected during this transition, not a standard we've abandoned — let us know if you spot one.