How We Verify
Astira Review operates under the following editorial principles: articles are reviewed by at least one second editor before publication, sources are cited where appropriate, corrections are noted publicly, and writers disclose any commercial relationships that could influence their selection of subject matter.
Editorial Principles
These principles govern every article published under the Astira Review name, regardless of authorship.
Independence
Astira Review is an independent editorial publication. It is not affiliated with any commercial, governmental or professional body. Editorial decisions are made by the editorial team and are not influenced by advertising relationships, affiliate arrangements or sponsorships.
Subject Selection
Articles are selected on the basis of editorial relevance to the publication's focus areas: daily practice, morning routines, mental clarity, physical wellbeing and balanced living. Topics are proposed by writers or by the editorial team. No topic is selected solely on the basis of its commercial appeal.
Sourcing Standards
Articles in Astira Review reference published research from peer-reviewed journals and reputable institutional sources. Editorial selection prioritises long-running studies and replicated findings. Where a claim is based on a single study or limited evidence, this is noted in the text. Writers are required to keep source notes on file for a minimum of twelve months following publication.
Review Process
Every piece is reviewed by at least one editor in addition to the originating writer before publication. The review process checks for factual accuracy, source adequacy, tonal consistency and compliance with these editorial standards. Pieces that do not meet the publication's standards are returned for revision or declined.
Writer Disclosure
Contributing writers disclose any commercial relationships that could influence their selection of subject matter. This disclosure appears within the author bio on each published piece. Writers with undisclosed relevant interests may have their work retracted without prior notice.
Corrections
Factual corrections are acknowledged and applied within five working days of receipt where a correction is substantiated. All corrections are noted at the foot of the relevant article with the date of amendment. The original text is not silently altered. Readers may submit correction requests via the contact form.
How Sources Are Selected
Primary Sources
Where possible, writers are directed to primary published research rather than secondary summaries. Institutional repositories, academic databases and governmental public-health publications are the preferred starting points.
Replicated Findings
Claims supported by a single study are presented with appropriate qualification. The editorial team prioritises findings that have been replicated across multiple independent studies or that represent a clear consensus among researchers in the relevant field.
Currency
Sources are assessed for recency. In rapidly developing areas of research, the editorial team notes where the landscape has evolved since a cited study was published and where earlier findings have been updated or revised by subsequent work.
Expert Consultation
On subjects requiring specialist knowledge, the editorial team consults with qualified wellness or nutrition professionals. Consulted individuals are not named without their consent and their input is integrated into the editorial review process rather than presented as formal endorsement.
Rejected Sources
The editorial team does not accept manufacturer-funded studies as sole sources for efficacy claims, nor does it regard press releases, product websites or brand-produced content as primary evidence. Such materials may be cited in context but are clearly identified as promotional in origin.
Source Retention
Writers retain full source notes for a minimum of twelve months following publication. The editorial team may request source documentation at any point during this period, including in response to a correction request or editorial review.
Transparency Statement
Astira Review does not carry paid advertising, sponsored posts or affiliate-only content within its editorial pages. The publication is funded through its own operations and does not receive sponsorship from supplement brands, wellness companies or related commercial entities.
Where contributing writers hold commercial interests adjacent to the subjects they cover — for example, where a writer also consults for a wellness brand — this relationship is disclosed in their author bio at the foot of each relevant article. Readers who believe a disclosure has been missed are encouraged to raise this through the editorial correspondence address.
Some articles may contain links to external publications, research repositories or third-party resources. These links are provided for reference purposes only. Astira Review does not endorse the organisations, products or services referenced by these external sources and does not receive remuneration for linking to them.
The publication acknowledges that wellness journalism operates in a field where the boundaries between personal observation, editorial interpretation and professional guidance are sometimes contested. Astira Review's position is that its content is editorial in nature — it reflects the considered observations of contributing writers, not professional guidance of any kind. Readers with specific concerns about their daily routines are encouraged to speak with a qualified wellness professional.
Editorial FAQs
Reader Notice
The nature of our editorial content and its limits as professional guidance.
Read Disclaimer →Contact Editorial
For corrections, submissions and general correspondence.
Get in Touch →