The Elsevier/Gold Standard editorial staff develops clinically-based drug information content through a peer-reviewed process. The peer-review process represents an objective analysis of clinically-relevant drug information. The content development cycle mimics the peer-review process in effect for major scientific publications. In general, editorial content follows the style of other peer-reviewed medical publications, including the style of the American Medical Association Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors. Ninth ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1998. Modifications to this style reflect recognized needs of database production, standardized within our internal policy.
Our editorial team includes the following basic categories:
Editor-In-Chief
Managing Editor
Senior Editor
General Editor
Freelance Writer
Editorial Assistant
To ensure the most up-to-date drug information is included, the editorial team updates clinical content in a "real time" format rather than working against quarterly deadlines. This allows for tremendous flexibility when establishing priorities for client updates and the ability to be responsive to late breaking medical news, trials and previously unannounced drug label changes.
Content updates to the database include new FDA-approved drugs, new non-prescription and herbal therapies, newly published information regarding FDA label changes and relevant clinical studies affecting off-label utilization. Each member of the editorial staff is responsible for monitoring certain therapeutic categories for pertinent information to be included in the database.
Every database update is subject to a strict editorial review process that employs a system of double checks to guarantee timely and accurate drug information. The process is ongoing and quality assurance activities are inserted throughout the content development cycle. The Senior Editors, Managing Editors and Editor-in-Chief periodically review the editorial process for system improvements.
The following is a list of reviewed indicators:
Significant updates per therapeutic category
Time from information release (FDA/Journals) to final content approval
Number and type of corrections required during the review process
Sections within the monograph requiring revisions
Corrections required per editor
Random sampling of references against monograph updates
Since the Elsevier/Gold Standard database includes new FDA-approved drugs, new non-prescription and herbal therapies, newly published information regarding FDA label changes and relevant clinical studies affecting off-label utilization, each member of the editorial staff is assigned to monitor specific therapeutic categories for significant information for incorporation into the database. For more information, refer to the Elsevier/Gold Standard Editorial Policy regarding Off-Label Data.
Because relationships between authors and pharmaceutical manufacturers can bias written content, it is important to emphasize the principles that underlie the editorial process. The editorial staff acknowledges that some level of interaction between Elsevier/Gold Standard and the pharmaceutical industry may facilitate the dissemination of scientific knowledge relating to drug therapy within database content. With that in mind, the internal and independent peer-review process is designed to eliminate manufacturer bias in drug information reporting. For instance, Elsevier/Gold Standard has implemented a single division of contact for all pharmaceutical manufacturer queries/submissions and has assigned this responsibility to Elsevier/Gold Standard team members not directly responsible for clinical data/monograph production. Editors have no significant financial relationships with the industry that might introduce bias in the editing or review of database content. For more information, refer to the Elsevier/Gold Standard Conflict of Interest Policy.