How we research, write and correct content
EMDR Match combines a specialist directory with informational content. This policy explains what the project can claim, what it cannot, and how information is separated from promotion.
Source hierarchy
We prioritize clinical guidelines and public bodies such as WHO and NICE, professional associations for training standards, and identified reviews or studies when needed. An individual experience or search trend is never presented as clinical evidence.
How topics are selected
We analyze the questions people ask when searching for EMDR in English and Spanish: meaning, process, indications, safety, cost, online delivery, comparisons and local search. Covering a query does not validate its premise: when evidence is limited, the page must say so clearly.
Health-content boundaries
- We do not diagnose from symptoms or queries.
- We do not promise outcomes, recovery or a fixed session count.
- We distinguish PTSD recommendations from uses with less evidence.
- We state when assessment or urgent help is needed.
Authorship and review
Current content is attributed to the EMDR Match Editorial Team and displays date, sources and scope. We do not claim individual clinical review where none exists. The next editorial layer is to add named clinical reviewers and record conflicts of interest.
Corrections and updates
We review pages when guidelines, professional standards or practical information change. A substantive correction updates the modification date. You may report an error without including personal clinical information.
Directory, verification and promotion
Verification checks four defined elements. It is not a clinical recommendation. Promoted profiles are disclosed; promotion cannot turn an explicit mismatch into a match.