What has been checked, and what has not

Our inventory contains 220 clinical objects: cancer, biomarker, drug, treatment, diagnostic, decision-situation, guide, and explainer pages. Every object has at least one recorded source. A recorded source is not proof that a doctor reviewed the page, and we do not treat those as the same thing.

At the inventory update date, no medical reviewer was registered and no review was active. All 220 objects therefore remain labelled as drafts. That label appears on the related page rather than being hidden in an internal note.

Draft means the content has been written and sourced, but no doctor has explicitly checked that version, stated the scope reviewed, and agreed to be named. Draft does not mean the content is necessarily wrong; it means the claim of doctor review may not be used.

We do not copy a doctor's name from another site, treat a public profile as consent, or change the status merely because a page has been online for a long time. The absence of a reviewer is an open blocker, not a reason to fill the field with a fictional name.

First, drafting from a traceable primary or official source. Second, an editorial check of scope, terminology, links, and high-risk claims. Third, a review packet containing the page, source list, uncertainties, and content-version hash. Fourth, the reviewer's decision: approve, approve with changes, require changes, or reject. Fifth, a separate status change after a valid review record exists.

Every approval is tied to a version hash. If the title, structured facts, sources, or claims change materially, the previous approval no longer applies and the page returns to draft until reviewed again. An approval also has an expiry date and does not survive merely because nobody edited the page.

We prioritise clinical guidelines, regulatory labels, trial registries, peer-reviewed publications, and official health-institution information. A terminology source does not become evidence for a treatment claim. Source type and relevance are shown so a reader can distinguish a definition, registry data, and efficacy evidence.

We do not publish untraceable success rates, hospital rankings, acceptance guarantees, or unconfirmed prices. Claims about benefit, safety, eligibility, or access require a stricter check than a definition. When the evidence is insufficient, the page states the limit instead of filling the gap with an estimate.

A commercial relationship with a hospital, laboratory, or provider must not determine the clinical review outcome. Reviewers are asked to disclose relevant affiliations and conflicts. An unresolved conflict blocks approval, and a commercial decision cannot change a review label.

Provider pages use a separate methodology that distinguishes public information, verified capability, and an access partner. A listed facility is not automatically superior, does not necessarily accept a case, and does not guarantee an outcome.

If you find an error, send the page, quotation, and a comparison source through the official contact. A material correction is recorded as a new version and requires re-review when it concerns a clinical claim. A safety correction may cause a page to be withdrawn or warned before review is complete.

Reviews have an expiry date. Changes to a guideline, regulator, registry, or new evidence may trigger an earlier re-review. An expired status may not remain labelled as doctor-reviewed merely because no update has been made.

We are looking for doctors with verifiable licensure and relevance to the area under review, such as medical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, or another specialty that fits the page. A reviewer needs to agree to public attribution of name, credentials, specialty, and relevant affiliation, and to disclose conflicts.

An initial scope can be limited to one group of pages, such as EGFR biomarkers or a lung-cancer question set. Review packets are prepared so the reviewer does not have to navigate the whole site. Contact fumax0444@gmail.com to discuss scope, time, and compensation separately; this page does not promise payment or an obligation that has not been agreed.

TanyaKanker is not a hospital, clinic, laboratory, or emergency service. We do not diagnose, prescribe, or determine eligibility for a therapy or clinical trial. The information on this site is educational and does not replace a doctor's examination.

An honest review status is more useful than a convincing label that cannot be defended. This page therefore shows zero when no review exists, and will change only when a valid review record is available.