Medical pages undergo internal review for alignment with conservative, evidence-informed practice within the center's scope.
We do not publish cure guarantees, «best doctor» claims, or 100% success advertising. Even reviewed text does not replace personalized consultation.
Review focuses on patient safety, accurate wording, cross-language alignment, and removal of unsupported recommendations or outcome guarantees.
Role of medical review
Healthy Spine clinical specialists verify that materials match conservative rehabilitation practice scope and contain no dangerous or misleading claims. We do not publish fictional reviewers with unverified credentials — the center remains the publisher. Review does not replace individual consultation for a specific patient.
Scope of review
Review covers knowledge articles, condition pages, Yerevan landing pages, patient guides, policies, and key informational blocks in Armenian, Russian, and English. Clinical claims are reviewed more strictly than general navigation text.
- Articles and condition pages
- Local landing pages
- Policies and patient guides
- Trilingual versions
Review process
Typical path: draft → clinical check by a relevant specialist → language edit → publication. Risky wording (guarantees, website diagnosis, aggressive recommendations) is sent back for revision. Published materials are periodically refreshed when practice or feedback changes.
- Fact and wording check
- Removal of unsupported claims
- Alignment with editorial policy
- Periodic refresh
Limitations
Even reviewed content remains general information. It does not account for individual history, test results, contraindications, or comorbidities. Review does not turn a webpage into a personal medical report or treatment plan.
Patient safety
Priority is to do no harm: materials should direct patients to in-person assessment for symptoms and emergency care for red flags. Wording that delays medical care is prohibited, as are recommendations to start exercises or procedures without specialist evaluation.
- Emergency care for red flags
- No treatment via website
- In-person assessment before loading
Evidence standards
We rely on accepted conservative rehabilitation principles and center clinical experience within its scope. Materials must not cite unverified methods or promise proven outcomes without qualifiers. Required wording includes «may help», «may support», and «results may vary».
Publication workflow
Changes are published without URL changes to preserve stability for patients and SEO. When one language version updates, key medical claims are aligned across languages. Patient feedback may trigger unscheduled review.
- Draft → review → publish
- Updates without URL changes
- hy/ru/en alignment
Relationship to editorial policy
Medical review complements editorial policy: editors ensure clarity and structure; clinical specialists ensure medical correctness within conservative practice. Both policies are published on the site for transparency.
Book an appointment · Find a doctor · Contact
Frequently asked questions
- Does reviewed content replace consultation?
- No. Content is not personalized or a prescription.
- Are specific reviewers named?
- No fictional names; the center remains responsible.
- How often is policy updated?
- As processes change; current version is on this page.
- Are all languages reviewed?
- Yes — hy, ru, en key claims are aligned.
- Can I rely on articles without a visit?
- Articles help prepare; decisions require examination.
- What if content differs from my doctor?
- Follow your treating physician; the site does not replace your plan.