Current status: Content on All About Ticks is not medically reviewed by a licensed clinician unless a page explicitly states that it was reviewed and names the reviewer.
Why review matters
Tick-borne disease topics can impact real health decisions. Independent review (when available) helps reduce errors and improve clarity, especially around symptoms, timelines, and treatment urgency.
What we do today
- Source-first writing: we prioritize reputable sources and aim to cite them near key claims.
- Conservative phrasing: we avoid definitive medical claims when evidence varies by region, surveillance, or evolving guidance.
- Corrections path: we accept and act on credible corrections (see Corrections Policy).
What “Reviewed by” will mean (future)
When we add independent reviewers, pages will clearly list the reviewer’s name, credentials, and review date. We will also define what was reviewed (e.g., clinical accuracy vs. general readability).
Medical disclaimer
This site is for educational purposes and is not medical advice. If you think you may have a tick-borne illness, seek professional medical care.