Content Review Process
SymptomGPT publishes educational health content at scale, so consistency matters. This page describes the process we use to review pages for clarity, safety language, trust signals, and ongoing quality.
Last reviewed: April 7, 2026
We focus the strongest review attention on pages that shape user trust, explain product methodology, or help interpret symptoms and lab results with high intent.
1. Scope and intent check
We confirm what the page is trying to help with, such as a symptom overview, a condition explainer, or a biomarker interpretation page. Pages should match informational intent, not promise diagnosis.
2. Structure and clarity review
We check whether the page clearly explains the topic, breaks down causes or interpretations in plain language, and separates urgent warning signs from general background information.
3. Safety and limitation review
We look for wording that could overstate certainty, minimize urgent symptoms, or imply that the tool replaces professional medical care. We add or strengthen disclaimers where needed.
4. Source and consistency review
We review whether the page points readers toward credible source categories and whether trust pages use consistent methodology, review-date labeling, and educational framing.
5. Update pass after publication
We revisit important pages when site methodology changes, internal linking improves, or we identify wording that should be tightened for trust, search quality, or usability.
What we check for on trust pages
- • visible last-reviewed dates
- • clear educational-only framing
- • consistent explanation of AI limitations
- • links to related methodology and policy pages
- • references to credible source categories where appropriate
What triggers a revision
- • improvements to product behavior or workflow
- • changes to internal editorial standards
- • new source guidance or better reference framing
- • wording that could create confusion or overconfidence
- • quality audits across key SEO and trust sections