Medslat is committed to accuracy, transparency, and responsible publishing.
We aim to research, review, and verify information before publication. However, no responsible publication can guarantee that every article will remain completely free from error or current indefinitely.
Errors may occur. Scientific understanding may develop. Official guidance may change. Statistics may be revised. New evidence may provide important context that was not previously available.
When a substantive issue is identified, Medslat aims to review it carefully and take appropriate action.
This Corrections Policy explains how readers can report potential errors, how correction requests are evaluated, the types of changes we may make, and how we approach transparency when published content is corrected or updated.
Learn Better. Choose Better. Live Better.
Our Approach to Corrections
Medslat treats corrections as part of responsible editorial publishing.
When a credible concern is raised about published content, we aim to evaluate the issue according to its substance, significance, and supporting evidence.
Our approach is guided by several principles:
- factual accuracy;
- fair evaluation of correction requests;
- evidence-based decision-making;
- transparency proportionate to the significance of the error;
- timely action on significant issues;
- preservation of editorial independence;
- willingness to update content when reliable evidence justifies a change.
A correction request does not automatically mean that published information is incorrect. Each substantive request should be evaluated on its merits.
What May Require a Correction?
A correction may be appropriate when published content contains a material factual error.
Examples may include:
- an incorrect name;
- an incorrect date;
- inaccurate statistics;
- incorrect attribution;
- a materially inaccurate quotation;
- an incorrect description of a study;
- misrepresentation of scientific findings;
- inaccurate medical information;
- outdated information presented as current;
- an incorrect sports result, record, schedule, or competition detail;
- a factual statement unsupported by the cited source;
- wording that materially changes the meaning of the available evidence;
- another substantive error that could mislead readers.
The appropriate response depends on the nature and significance of the issue.
What Is Not Necessarily a Factual Error?
Not every disagreement requires a correction.
A correction may not be appropriate merely because:
- a reader prefers different wording;
- a reader disagrees with an editorial opinion;
- multiple reasonable interpretations of uncertain evidence exist;
- a source reaches a different conclusion;
- a reader dislikes the subject or conclusion of an article;
- new information became available after the original publication;
- stylistic preferences differ;
- an article does not include every possible perspective or source.
However, even when an issue is not technically a factual error, Medslat may consider whether clarification, additional context, or an update would improve the article.
How to Submit a Correction Request
If you believe that content published on Medslat contains a factual error, contact us at:
Use the subject line:
[CORRECTION] Article Title
To help us evaluate your request, please include:
- the article title;
- the complete article URL;
- the specific statement or section in question;
- a clear explanation of the potential error;
- the correction you believe should be considered;
- supporting evidence or authoritative references where available;
- your name and relevant professional background, if you choose to provide it.
Detailed correction requests can generally be evaluated more effectively than messages that simply state that an article is wrong without identifying the specific issue.
Medical Content Concerns
Potential errors involving health and medical content may require additional evaluation because inaccurate information can have significant consequences.
For substantive medical concerns, you may contact:
Use the subject line:
[MEDICAL FEEDBACK] Article Title
Please include the article URL, identify the specific medical statement or section concerned, explain the issue, and provide relevant supporting references where possible.
Depending on the nature of the concern, Medslat may review relevant scientific literature, official guidance, regulatory information, or seek appropriate subject-matter input.
For more information about our approach to eligible medical content, please read our Medical Review Policy.
How We Evaluate Correction Requests
The exact evaluation process may vary according to the nature and complexity of the issue.
A review may include the following steps.
1. Identify the Specific Claim
We identify the exact statement, statistic, quotation, interpretation, or other information being challenged.
Correction requests should be specific enough to allow meaningful evaluation.
2. Review the Original Sources
Where applicable, we examine the sources used when the article was prepared or last updated.
This may involve reviewing:
- original research;
- official documents;
- public health guidance;
- government information;
- regulatory documents;
- statistical databases;
- official sports records;
- transcripts or original statements;
- other sources relevant to the claim.
3. Examine Additional Evidence
We may consider additional credible evidence provided by the person submitting the correction or identified during our own review.
The fact that a source disagrees with an article does not automatically establish that the article is wrong. The quality, relevance, date, context, and authority of the available evidence should be considered.
4. Seek Additional Review Where Appropriate
For complex or sensitive matters, additional editorial or subject-matter review may be appropriate.
Health and medical concerns may require evaluation according to the principles described in our Medical Review Policy.
5. Determine the Appropriate Action
After evaluating the issue, Medslat may:
- make a correction;
- clarify wording;
- add missing context;
- update outdated information;
- revise a headline;
- update a source or reference;
- add an editorial note;
- substantially revise the article;
- remove content in exceptional circumstances;
- retain the existing content when the available evidence does not justify a change.
The action taken should be proportionate to the nature and significance of the issue.
Minor Corrections
Minor corrections are changes that do not materially alter the meaning, conclusions, or substantive information of an article.
Examples may include:
- typographical errors;
- spelling errors;
- punctuation;
- formatting problems;
- minor grammatical corrections;
- broken links;
- minor wording improvements that do not change meaning.
Minor corrections may be made without a formal correction notice.
The purpose of a correction notice is transparency about substantive changes, not documenting every typographical adjustment.
Substantive Corrections
A substantive correction involves an error or change that materially affects the accuracy or interpretation of an article.
Examples may include:
- correcting an inaccurate medical claim;
- revising a materially incorrect statistic;
- correcting a mischaracterization of scientific research;
- correcting a false attribution;
- changing information that could materially mislead readers;
- correcting a significant error in sports reporting;
- revising a conclusion affected by incorrect factual information.
Where appropriate, substantive corrections may be accompanied by a correction note or editor’s note explaining the nature of the change.
The level of detail provided should be proportionate to the significance of the correction.
Clarifications
Sometimes information may be factually accurate but unclear, incomplete, or capable of being reasonably misunderstood.
In such cases, Medslat may add clarification rather than issue a factual correction.
A clarification may:
- explain terminology;
- provide additional context;
- distinguish between related concepts;
- explain uncertainty;
- clarify the scope of a claim;
- improve the distinction between association and causation;
- explain that evidence is preliminary or limited.
Clarifications are intended to improve understanding without suggesting that accurate information was necessarily incorrect.
Content Updates
An update is not always the same as a correction.
Content may be updated because:
- new research becomes available;
- clinical guidance changes;
- regulations are revised;
- new statistics are published;
- a sports schedule or result changes;
- a developing event progresses;
- product information changes;
- additional context becomes relevant;
- an article is expanded or improved.
Where the original information was accurate at the time of publication but later became outdated, the appropriate action may be an update rather than a correction.
Medslat may revise the displayed updated date when substantive changes are made.
Minor formatting or grammatical edits should not necessarily result in an updated publication date.
Correction Notes and Editor’s Notes
When a substantive error is corrected, Medslat may add a visible note to explain what changed.
Depending on the circumstances, a note may identify:
- what information was incorrect;
- what information replaced it;
- when the correction was made;
- relevant context concerning the change.
A correction note should be clear and proportionate.
Example:
Correction: This article was updated on [date] to correct the reported percentage from X% to Y%. The original figure was inaccurate.
For a substantial editorial change, an editor’s note may provide broader context.
Medslat does not need to publish a correction note for every spelling, punctuation, formatting, or minor stylistic change.
Headline Corrections
Headlines are subject to the same standards of factual accuracy as article content.
A headline may require correction if it:
- materially misrepresents the article;
- exaggerates scientific evidence;
- presents association as causation;
- states an unconfirmed report as established fact;
- contains an incorrect name, date, number, or result;
- promises an outcome unsupported by the content.
Correcting an inaccurate headline does not necessarily require changing the article URL.
URL changes should be approached carefully because they can affect existing links, indexing, and accessibility.
URL Changes
Medslat generally aims to avoid changing published URLs solely because a title or headline has been corrected.
If a URL must be changed for a legitimate reason, an appropriate permanent redirect should be implemented where technically possible.
Published URLs should not be changed casually because external websites, search engines, social media posts, bookmarks, and internal links may already reference the existing address.
Corrections to Medical Content
Substantive medical corrections may require particular care.
When a medical error is confirmed, Medslat may:
- correct the inaccurate statement;
- revise surrounding context;
- update supporting sources;
- reassess related claims;
- request additional review where appropriate;
- add a correction note if the error was material.
If a medical article has previously been identified as medically reviewed and later undergoes significant substantive revision, Medslat should consider whether additional medical review is appropriate.
Medical review attribution should accurately reflect actual review activity.
Corrections to Sports Content
Sports information may change quickly, particularly in relation to schedules, injuries, transfers, competition results, disciplinary decisions, and developing events.
Medslat distinguishes between:
- information that was incorrect when published; and
- information that was accurate when published but later changed.
An incorrect match result, record, quotation, or confirmed fact may require a correction.
A schedule that is officially changed after publication generally requires an update rather than a correction, provided the original information was accurate at the time.
Anonymous Correction Requests
Medslat may consider correction requests submitted without complete personal identification if the issue can be independently verified.
However, providing relevant context and supporting evidence can make evaluation more effective.
Professional credentials should not be fabricated or misrepresented when submitting feedback.
The strength of a correction request should ultimately depend on the evidence and substance of the issue, not solely on the identity of the person submitting it.
Response to Correction Requests
Medslat aims to review substantive correction requests responsibly.
However, submitting a request does not guarantee:
- a personal response;
- acceptance of the proposed correction;
- removal of an article;
- publication of the submitter’s preferred wording;
- immediate action in every case.
The time required for review may vary depending on the complexity of the issue, availability of relevant evidence, and whether additional editorial or subject-matter assessment is needed.
Removal of Content
Content removal is generally reserved for exceptional circumstances.
Depending on the situation, removal may be considered when:
- content creates a significant legal or safety concern;
- the fundamental basis of the article is materially unreliable;
- privacy considerations justify removal;
- the content cannot be responsibly corrected;
- another exceptional circumstance makes continued publication inappropriate.
Where an article can be responsibly corrected or updated, correction may be preferable to complete removal.
Content should not be removed merely because an individual or organization dislikes accurate reporting or criticism.
Requests from Sources and Organizations
Individuals, companies, institutions, healthcare organizations, sports organizations, and other entities mentioned in Medslat content may submit correction requests.
Such requests are evaluated according to the same principles of evidence, accuracy, context, and editorial independence.
Commercial relationships, advertising arrangements, partnership discussions, or threats to withdraw business should not determine whether factual information is corrected.
If information is inaccurate, it should be corrected appropriately.
If information is accurate and adequately supported, commercial pressure alone should not determine editorial changes.
Corrections and Editorial Independence
The correction process must remain independent from advertising and commercial influence.
Advertisers, sponsors, affiliate partners, and other commercial parties should not be permitted to purchase corrections, suppress accurate information, or require unsupported claims to remain published.
At the same time, Medslat should fairly consider factual evidence submitted by any party, including commercial organizations.
The identity of the submitter does not replace evaluation of the evidence.
Reader Feedback Beyond Corrections
Not every useful reader submission is a correction request.
Readers may also identify:
- unclear explanations;
- missing context;
- outdated links;
- opportunities for additional coverage;
- new evidence;
- accessibility problems;
- technical issues.
For general editorial feedback, contact:
Use the subject line:
[EDITORIAL] Article Title
Constructive feedback may help improve existing content and future editorial coverage.
Relationship With Our Other Editorial Policies
This Corrections Policy forms part of Medslat’s broader editorial framework.
Our Editorial Policy explains the general principles governing content creation and publication.
Our Fact-Checking Policy explains how factual claims and sources are evaluated.
Our Medical Review Policy explains the approach used for eligible health and medical content that undergoes medical review.
These policies should be read together to understand Medslat’s overall approach to editorial accuracy and accountability.
Policy Updates
Medslat may update this Corrections Policy as our editorial processes, organizational capabilities, technologies, or responsibilities develop.
Material changes may be reflected by updating the date displayed on this page.
Last Updated: July 5, 2026
Contact Us
To report a potential factual error, contact:
Subject:
[CORRECTION] Article Title
For substantive medical concerns:
[MEDICAL FEEDBACK] Article Title
Please include the article URL, identify the specific information in question, explain your concern clearly, and provide supporting evidence or authoritative references where available.
For other communications, please visit our Contact Us page.
Medslat.com
Learn Better. Choose Better. Live Better.