Editorial standards
Clear guidance starts with careful standards.
Oral Compass exists to make oral health easier to understand. Every page should help a real reader feel more informed without pretending to diagnose, treat, or replace professional care.
How topics are chosen
Topics are selected around common reader concerns, practical oral health questions, search intent, evidence availability, safety risk, and how well the topic fits the Learn, Understand, and Discuss pillars.
How articles are written
Content is written in plain language and organized around what a reader is likely trying to understand. Headlines should be accurate, calm, and helpful rather than shocking, overpromising, or designed only for search traffic.
Evidence and sources
Articles should rely on appropriate public sources and internal evidence notes. Sources should support the explanation instead of being used as decoration. When evidence is limited or mixed, the page should say so carefully.
AI-assisted workflow
AI tools may help organize drafts, identify missing questions, or improve clarity. Final publication decisions, wording, source use, and safety boundaries remain part of the Oral Compass editorial workflow and founder approval process.
Review and updates
Published articles include dates that help readers understand when the page was published, updated, and reviewed. Pages should be refreshed when evidence, safety guidance, site standards, or reader needs materially change.
Reader-first boundaries
Oral Compass avoids diagnosis, personalized treatment instructions, product pressure, scare tactics, and content that exists only to fill a calendar. If a topic is too risky to explain safely without review, it should wait.