How we make a page worth reading.

Who writes the content

Content is drafted by the AllMeds editorial team and clinically reviewed by a registered pharmacist (currently Luke McGrath, RPh) before publication. Pages that include a "Reviewed by" block have completed this process. Pages without it have not yet been clinically reviewed and are treated as general information only.

How we source information

We use these sources, in this order of priority:

1. Medicines regulators. TGA (Australia), FDA (United States), MHRA (United Kingdom), EMA (Europe). Product information, scheduling, approvals, and safety advisories.
2. National clinical guidelines. NICE (UK), RACGP (Australia), CDC (US), BPAC (NZ), Therapeutic Guidelines Australia, and equivalent national bodies.
3. Authoritative drug databases. Australian Medicines Handbook, MIMS, BNF, Micromedex where licensed access supports a specific claim.
4. Peer-reviewed primary literature. For specific claims, mechanisms, or interactions where a regulator/guideline is insufficient.

We do not use AI model output as a primary source. AI assists with drafting and structuring — the source itself must be human and verifiable. See our methodology for more.

The review workflow

1. Draft

   Editorial team drafts content from primary sources (regulator, guideline, database). AI assists with structuring and language but does not introduce facts.

2. Source check

   Every clinical claim must trace to a named source. Unsourced claims are removed, not rewritten.

3. Pharmacist review

   Luke (or a future board reviewer) reads the draft, flags or corrects clinical inaccuracies, and approves the page for publication. Review notes are kept internally.

4. Publish with attribution

   The page goes live with a "Reviewed by" block showing the reviewer's name, credentials, and review date. The reviewer block links to the reviewer's profile.

5. Scheduled re-review

   Reviewed pages are re-checked at least every 12 months, or sooner if a regulator issues new safety advice that affects the page.

How we use AI

AI assists with drafting, summarising, structuring, and editing language. AI does not determine clinical facts, set dosing, classify severity, or sign off on a page. Final clinical responsibility for every reviewed page sits with the named pharmacist. We explain this in more detail in our AI safety and limitations page.

For consumer-facing interactive tools (e.g. our drug interaction checker), AI responses are constrained to vetted source material and clearly labelled. Tool outputs do not constitute a published page or a clinical review.

Update standards

We update a page's "Last reviewed" date only when the page itself has actually been re-reviewed. We do not change dates to look fresh in search results — this is something search engines watch for and consumers can tell. If we make a meaningful change without a full re-review (for example, a small correction), we publish it as a dated correction rather than a re-review.

Conflict of interest

AllMeds.ai content is not sponsored by pharmaceutical manufacturers, distributors, or insurers. We do not accept payment to feature, recommend, or hide any specific medicine.

Independent Med Management (IMM), our affiliated clinical practice, receives payment from insurers, self-insurers, and government agencies for structured independent medication reviews. These reviews are independent and do not influence AllMeds.ai published content. Where IMM's aggregated review data informs an article (always anonymised; never individual claims), we say so on the page.

Corrections

If you find a clinical error or out-of-date information, please tell us. We acknowledge within 1 working day, investigate within 5 working days, and either correct the page (with a dated correction note) or explain why we believe the current content is accurate. Full process on our corrections page.

Contact

Editorial questions: luke@allmeds.ai
Corrections: see our corrections page