Our vet reviewers.

What we offer instead is the thing a reviewer's signature is supposed to stand for: every clinical claim carries a citation you can open and check yourself, we name the study design rather than only the conclusion, and every correction we have ever made is published in full on our corrections log. If a number on this site has no source next to it, treat that as our error and tell us.

Vet review program

We are actively building out our roster of reviewers. If you are a U.S.- or UK-licensed veterinarian — particularly a board-certified surgeon (DACVS), rehabilitation specialist (CCRP / DACVSMR), or sports-medicine practitioner — and you'd like to be considered, please reach out via our contact page.

What review will involve

• Verifying that clinical claims match current peer-reviewed evidence.
• Flagging any guidance that conflicts with AAHA, ACVS, or breed-specific consensus.
• Adding clinically important caveats — drug interactions, contraindications, symptoms that warrant urgent care.
• Approving the final published version under their named credential.

Articles awaiting review

That is currently all of them. Articles tagged “Vet review pending” have been written, researched and edited by our editorial team but have not completed independent veterinary review, because there is not yet a reviewer to complete it. The status appears on every article header, and reviewer credit will be added per-article as reviews are done — not applied retroactively across the site.

Editorial independence

When the program is running, reviewers will be paid a flat fee per article reviewed. They will have no equity, no affiliate participation, and no involvement in product selection or scoring. Their job is to verify medical accuracy. If a reviewer flags a claim, we either correct it or remove the article — we don't publish over a vet's objection.