Editorial Methodology

This page describes the editorial standards and research methodology OCC-Doc uses when creating documentation. Our goal is transparency about how we gather, evaluate, and present health-related information.

Source Hierarchy

We prioritize sources according to their position in the evidence hierarchy:

1. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses — Aggregated analysis of multiple studies
2. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) — Gold standard for intervention research
3. Cohort and observational studies — Population-level observations
4. Case reports and case series — Individual or small-group observations
5. Expert consensus and clinical guidelines — Professional body recommendations
6. Mechanistic and preclinical research — Laboratory and animal studies

We clearly distinguish between different levels of evidence when documenting research findings.

Source Types

OCC-Doc references the following types of sources:

• Peer-reviewed journals indexed in PubMed, MEDLINE, or equivalent databases
• Government health agencies (NIH, CDC, FDA, WHO, EMA)
• Medical textbooks from established publishers
• Clinical guidelines from professional medical societies
• Cochrane Reviews and similar systematic review organizations

Editorial Process

Each piece of documentation follows this process:

1. Topic identification: Selecting subjects based on clinical relevance and reader interest
2. Literature review: Searching databases for relevant peer-reviewed publications
3. Synthesis: Summarizing findings while maintaining accuracy
4. Plain language translation: Converting clinical terminology into accessible language
5. Limitation acknowledgment: Noting gaps, conflicts, or uncertainties in the research
6. Review: Internal review for accuracy and clarity

Language Standards

Our documentation adheres to these language principles:

• No efficacy claims: We describe what research documents, not what "works"
• No medical advice: We never suggest diagnosis, treatment, or dosage
• Hedged language: We use terms like "research suggests," "studies indicate," "has been observed"
• Conflict disclosure: We note funding sources or conflicts of interest documented in cited studies

Updates and Corrections

Health research evolves. When significant new evidence emerges that affects our documentation:

• We update the relevant content with current information
• We note the date of the most recent update
• Substantive corrections are noted at the bottom of affected articles

Limitations

We acknowledge that:

• We may not capture all relevant literature on any given topic
• Our summaries necessarily simplify complex research
• Translation from clinical to plain language involves editorial judgment
• Our documentation is not a substitute for professional medical consultation

Questions about our methodology can be directed to our contact page.