Editorial Standards, Sources and Corrections

Our editorial purpose is to explain science accurately, use sources responsibly, and distinguish established knowledge from preliminary findings and our own practical suggestions.

Source selection

We prioritize original peer-reviewed research, rigorous evidence reviews, university textbooks, public scientific institutions, and recognized professional scientific societies. Institutional press releases provide context; they do not replace the underlying study when a claim depends on its methods or results. We examine study design, participants, outcomes, uncertainty, funding, and conflicts where relevant and accessible.

Citations and responsible reuse

Links beside factual claims identify their support. A source list provides titles, institutions or authors, and access dates. We explain facts in our own words and use original examples, tables, and decision tools. We do not reproduce articles, lightly rewrite another author’s article paragraph by paragraph, copy source images, or assume that attribution grants a license. Direct quotations, if necessary, must be brief, clearly marked and attributed; reproduced assets require documented permission or an appropriate license.

We do not imply that cited institutions endorse Science Chronicle. Scientific facts may be explained independently; another publisher’s expression, graphics, photographs and tables require separate rights consideration.

Evidence and uncertainty

We distinguish experiments from observational research, association from causation, animal findings from human findings, and preprints from peer-reviewed work. We identify the date and limitations of older reviews. A study about one product, population or outcome is not treated as proof for all products or readers.

Authors, AI and product guides

Published articles may use AI-assisted research, fact validation, and writing. We disclose this process and do not claim independent clinical review. Science Chronicle is the publication byline. Buying guides explain selection criteria and limitations; research-based guidance is labeled accordingly. Hands-on testing, use of a product, credentials and expert review are claimed only when documented.

Corrections and updates

Use our contact form to report a possible error. Include the article URL, the disputed claim and supporting evidence. We assess reports against the sources. When a material correction is made, the article should identify the change and date; a cosmetic edit should not be used to make old reporting appear new. Source access dates are not claims of independent scientific review.

Commercial independence

Editorial conclusions should remain useful if all commercial links are removed. We do not sell favorable conclusions or publish invented product scores. See our affiliate disclosure. Health content is educational, not a diagnostic or treatment service.