Our Editorial Process
How articles are researched, written, medically reviewed, updated and corrected — and who is accountable for each step.
Last updated
Parents make decisions based on what they read at 3am on a phone. That is a serious responsibility, and it is the reason this page exists in detail rather than as a paragraph.
Who writes for us
Every article carries a named author with a linked profile stating their background. We do not publish anonymously, and we do not publish under invented bylines.
Our writers are journalists and subject specialists. They are not a substitute for a clinician, which is why clinical content goes through the review step below.
Medical review
Any article touching on symptoms, safety, medication, feeding or developmental concern is reviewed by a licensed clinician from our medical review team before publication.
A reviewer checks that:
- The guidance reflects current professional recommendations
- Uncertainty is described honestly rather than smoothed over
- Developmental information is presented as ranges, not deadlines
- The article is explicit about when a parent should contact their own clinician
- Nothing in it could lead a parent to delay care
Reviewed articles show the reviewer's name and the review date. Medical review checks clinical accuracy and safety. It is not an endorsement of any product mentioned, and our reviewers hold no financial interest in the products we cover.
Sourcing
We prioritise, in order: professional body guidance (AAP, ACOG, WHO, NHS, CDC), systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and individual peer-reviewed studies. Sources are listed at the foot of every clinical article with links, so you can check our work rather than take our word for it.
Where the evidence is genuinely unsettled — which in infant care it often is — we say so. "We don't know" is a legitimate answer and we would rather print it than manufacture confidence.
What we will not publish
- Developmental milestones framed as deadlines a baby can fail
- Health claims we cannot source
- Content that discourages a parent from seeking medical care
- Product recommendations that conflict with current safety guidance
- Coverage of our own product without a disclosure attached
Updates
Infant health guidance changes. Articles show a last updated date, and that date reflects a genuine substantive review — we do not refresh dates to look current in search results.
Clinical articles are reviewed on a scheduled basis and immediately when relevant guidance changes.
Corrections
When we get something wrong, we fix it and say that we fixed it. Substantive corrections are noted on the article itself, not silently edited away.
Email editorial@thebabyinsider.com if you spot an error. Reports of clinical inaccuracy are prioritised.
Commercial independence
Advertising and affiliate relationships have no influence over editorial judgement or ranking. Our evaluation criteria are set before testing, and our advertising disclosure explains the commercial relationships in full — including our ownership relationship with the BabyLeap app.
What this site is not
The Baby Insider provides general education. It is not medical advice, it does not create a doctor–patient relationship, and it cannot account for your baby's specific circumstances. Your own clinician's guidance always takes precedence over anything you read here.
If you think your child needs medical attention, seek it. Do not wait to finish reading.