Standards

The rules we work to

Our standards are written down because they are meant to be checked. They apply to every project, every client and every funding arrangement.

Authorship

Authorship on every manuscript we support follows the four ICMJE criteria: substantial contribution to conception, design, acquisition or analysis; drafting or critical revision; final approval of the version to be published; and accountability for the work as a whole.

Contributors who do not meet all four criteria are acknowledged, not listed as authors. Guest authorship, gift authorship and ghost authorship are refused without exception.

Where Health Hub provides writing support, that support is disclosed by name in the acknowledgements along with its funding source. The authors, not Health Hub, control the content and approve the final submission.

Good Publication Practice

Company-sponsored research is planned and reported in line with Good Publication Practice guidelines. Publication plans are documented in advance, and results are reported whether or not they favour the sponsor.

Data underlying any claim must be available to the authors in full. We do not write from summary slides or selected outputs.

Reporting follows the guideline appropriate to the design — CONSORT for trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews, CARE for case reports — and trials are registered before enrolment.

Journal Selection

Journals are recommended on scientific fit, readership and indexing, never on ease of acceptance. We assess indexing in recognised databases, editorial board transparency, peer-review process and article-processing charges before proposing a target.

We prioritise credible peer-reviewed and indexed publications, and we advise clients carefully when a journal’s editorial practices or publishing model raise concerns.

A submission ladder with primary and alternative targets is agreed with the authors at the outset, so that a rejection leads to a planned resubmission rather than a compromise.

Event and Engagement Compliance

Healthcare professionals engaged as faculty, advisors or investigators are selected on documented scientific expertise and contracted in writing before work begins.

Compensation reflects fair market value for the time and expertise provided, is unrelated to prescribing or purchasing, and is recorded with supporting documentation.

Educational programmes are built from an identified practice gap. Funders may support a programme, but they do not select faculty, shape content or review slides for commercial advantage. Hospitality remains modest and secondary to the scientific purpose.

Confidentiality

Client data, unpublished results, protocols and commercial plans are treated as confidential and handled under written agreement. Access is limited to the team members working on the project.

Patient-level data is de-identified before it reaches our analysts wherever the study design allows, and is stored on access-controlled systems. We follow the approvals granted by the relevant ethics committee.

We do not disclose client relationships without permission, and we manage competing engagements so that no team works across directly competing products.