Editorial standards

Editorial Policy

How we ensure the information on this site is accurate, trustworthy, and up to date.

WorriedAboutSTDs.com is committed to providing accurate, evidence-based sexual health information that people can trust when they need it most. This page explains the standards we hold ourselves to and the process we follow for every piece of content we publish.

Our editorial principles

Evidence-based

All content is grounded in peer-reviewed research and current clinical guidelines. We draw on sources including BASHH, UKHSA, NHS England, WHO, and landmark published studies. We cite our sources and link to primary references where possible.

Expert reviewed

Medical content is reviewed by qualified sexual health clinicians before publication. Reviewers check clinical accuracy, ensure guidance aligns with current UK practice, and flag anything that requires nuance or a professional consultation.

Regularly updated

Sexual health guidance changes as evidence evolves. We review all clinical content on a rolling basis — at minimum annually — and update pages promptly when guidelines change, new treatments emerge, or significant new evidence is published.

Written for real people

We write for people who are worried, not for clinicians. We avoid jargon where possible, explain technical terms when necessary, and prioritise clarity over completeness. If something requires a clinical assessment, we say so directly.

Transparent about limitations

We are clear about what this site can and cannot do. It provides educational information, not medical advice. Every content page carries a medical disclaimer, and we actively encourage readers to consult a healthcare professional for their individual situation.

Free from commercial influence

Our content is written to inform, not to sell. We do not accept payment to feature products, services, or clinics, and we do not allow advertising to influence editorial decisions. If we mention a treatment or service, it is because it is clinically relevant.

Our content process

Research and drafting

A writer with a background in health communication researches the topic using peer-reviewed literature, clinical guidelines, and authoritative public health sources. A draft is written to our plain-language style guide, with all claims referenced.

Medical review

The draft is reviewed by a qualified sexual health clinician — typically a doctor or specialist nurse with active clinical experience. The reviewer checks factual accuracy, appropriate clinical nuance, and alignment with current UK guidelines.

Editorial review

An editor reviews the content for clarity, consistency, tone, and accessibility. We check that the piece answers the questions a reader is likely to have, avoids unnecessary technical language, and clearly signposts when professional advice is needed.

Publication with attribution

Published content carries the reviewer's name, credentials, and the date of most recent review. This allows readers to assess the currency of the information and the qualifications of the reviewer.

Ongoing review

All content pages are scheduled for periodic review. High-priority pages — those covering rapidly evolving areas such as HIV treatment, antimicrobial resistance, or recently updated screening programmes — are reviewed more frequently.

Our primary sources

We draw on authoritative clinical guidelines and public health data from the following organisations, among others:

British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH)
UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA)
NHS England and NHS Digital
World Health Organization (WHO)
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)
British HIV Association (BHIVA)
Public Health Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland
Peer-reviewed journals including The Lancet, BMJ, and STI journal

Corrections and feedback

If you believe that any content on this site is inaccurate, out of date, or misleading, we want to know. We take corrections seriously and will investigate all credible concerns promptly. Please use our Contact page to send us your feedback, and include the specific page URL and the nature of the concern.