How we review medical content
glpzoom compares telehealth programs; we do not prescribe, dispense, or sell any treatment. Our clinical pages are written and reviewed by the editorial team against primary sources, and we are explicit about where a statement comes from rather than attaching it to a name.
Editorial transparency
Clinical advisory pipeline
Currently signed
0
named, verifiable clinical reviewers
First-year target
8
across obesity medicine, endocrinology, primary care, health equity
Currently reviewing
Editorial team
against FDA labels + peer-reviewed primary sources
0/8 advisors signed
Honest status: No named clinicians have been engaged as paid editorial reviewers yet. Every clinical page on GLPZoom is currently reviewed by our editorial team against primary sources (FDA labels, peer-reviewed trials, specialty guidelines). This is documented and dated on each page.
We choose this transparency over the alternative — many health sites publish “reviewed by Dr. X” bylines without the actual review having happened, or with reviewers who are not independently verifiable. We will not do that.
For clinicians
Become a paid editorial reviewer
Board-certified specialists in obesity medicine, endocrinology, T2D care, or primary care: we pay per review (~$300/page), 4-6 reviews per year. No clinical-trial sponsorship, no pharma money. Named attribution + credential verification.
[email protected] · Subject: “Editorial reviewer application”
For partners
Editorial standards verification
B2B partners, regulators, or quality raters who need access to our review methodology, source-checking process, or correction audit log: we maintain a documentation package for due diligence.
What we check every clinical claim against
- Regulatory
FDA-approved prescribing information (the drug label), FDA safety communications, recalls, and the public approval record. This is the ceiling for what we will state about an approved use, dose, or warning.
- Primary evidence
Peer-reviewed randomized trials and their published results (for example the SELECT and SURMOUNT programs for GLP-1s). We cite the trial, not a press release about it.
- Specialty guidelines
Position statements from the relevant specialty societies (endocrinology, urology, dermatology, psychiatry, menopause care). These set the standard-of-care framing.
- Real-world pricing & availability
Published cash prices, manufacturer savings programs, and what the comparison programs actually charge and stock, checked against their own current pages.
How current the content is
Each clinical page shows a “last reviewed” date. That date means the content was checked against the sources above for the current cycle, and re-checked whenever labeling, guidance, or a program's pricing and availability change. It is a sourcing claim, not a claim that a clinician personally re-read every one of our pages that month.
Named clinical review
When a page has been reviewed by a named, licensed clinician, their name, credentials, and a licensure-verification link appear on that page. We will only ever attribute a review to a real, verifiable person, so where you see organization-level attribution, no individual clinician has signed off and you should weigh the content as editorial research checked against the sources above.
Independence
We earn affiliate commissions when readers choose some of the programs we compare. Rankings and clinical statements are never sold. A program that pays us nothing is ranked on identical criteria. See our editorial policy and advertising policy.