Editorial standards

Useful information should help a reader understand a decision, not make the evidence sound stronger than it is. These standards guide the content published on Aging & Community.

Use identifiable sources

Research summaries link to the original study, publisher, PubMed record or another clearly identified source. Citations include the authors, publication year and a DOI where available.

A university or government website may host a paper without endorsing every conclusion or a service mentioned elsewhere. We attribute findings to the study authors and publication, not to the reputation of the domain hosting a copy.

Explain the method as well as the result

Study entries identify the design and the population. Surveys of preferences, organizational descriptions, member experiences and randomized trials answer different questions. We do not present them as interchangeable evidence.

We retain limitations that materially affect interpretation, including self-report, lack of a comparison group, short follow-up and outcomes that did not improve.

Keep numbers in context

A percentage is tied to the population and period studied. We distinguish a percentage-point difference from a relative change and do not convert odds or hazard ratios into unsupported personal predictions.

The research collection contains selected publications, not a claim to cover every study. An older study is dated clearly. A page’s publication or revision date is not used to make old data appear new.

Separate study findings from practical suggestions

A checklist or question guide is an editorial planning aid unless it is specifically identified as a tested instrument. We do not imply that using one of our worksheets produces the outcomes of a clinical trial.

Medical instructions, safe transport requirements and individual equipment decisions require appropriate professional input. Our role is to make the questions clearer and the supporting evidence easier to understand.

Attribute other people’s work

Report records name the original authors and publication. Summaries use original wording and link to sources. Figures, photographs, tables and full documents require an appropriate licence or permission before republication.

Where only a bibliographic record has been checked, we do not reconstruct unverified results. Readers are directed to the original publication for report-specific methods, tables and figures.

Identify commercial relationships

Aging & Community and MedicalRide share ownership. Relevant service references include that disclosure. They are kept separate from the reporting of study findings; the existence of a source citation does not imply that researchers tested or recommend MedicalRide.

We do not use fabricated testimonials, invented expert reviewers or claims of results that have not been demonstrated.

Keep revisions meaningful

A substantive revision should correct or improve the page, and its date should reflect that work. Technical changes do not turn a 2012 survey into contemporary evidence.

When checking a finding, readers should follow the linked original source and note its population, publication date and limitations. Our guide to reading research explains the distinctions in more detail.