An evidence site is wrong in two different ways. Sometimes it makes a mistake — a mistyped number, a misread trial, a citation attached to the wrong claim. Sometimes it was right and the literature moved: a trial reports, a systematic review pools the trials, a safety signal appears. Both need fixing, and the reader deserves to know which one happened.
This page defines what counts as a correction, how each class is handled, and how to report one. The record of what has actually been corrected lives in the evidence changelog.
A number, name, date, dose or mechanism stated wrongly in the prose.
Handling: corrected as soon as it is verified. If the error could have changed what a reader did — a dose, a safety statement, an interaction — a dated correction note is added to the page itself and the change is written into the changelog. Cosmetic fixes (spelling, broken formatting) are made silently.
A study attached to the wrong claim, a wrong PMID or DOI, a quoted effect that does not appear in the cited paper, or a citation that cannot be resolved.
Handling: the claim comes down first and goes back up only when it has a source that supports it. Citation errors are treated as more serious than prose errors, because the citation is the entire product.
New evidence, or a re-reading of existing evidence, changes a product’s grade in either direction.
Handling: always logged, always dated, never silent. The log entry names the product, the old and new grade, the evidence that moved it, and who made the call. The downgrade triggers are published in advance so that a change can be checked against the stated rule rather than taken on faith.
A commercial relationship that was not disclosed, a missing affiliate marker, or an out-of-date monetisation list.
Handling: treated as the most serious class. The disclosure is fixed immediately, the money relationships list is brought up to date, and the omission is logged with its date — including the period during which it was undisclosed.
Corrections are read by Gabriel Radu, DO. A report that includes a primary source is acted on far faster than one that does not, because it can be verified in a minute instead of researched from scratch. Please include:
Where to send it. Magellan does not yet publish a dedicated corrections mailbox. Until it does, post the correction in the discussion attached to the page in the Magellan store — the community area collects them and they are reviewed there. This is an interim channel and this page will be updated the day a permanent one exists.
Good-faith disagreement about how to weigh a body of evidence is not a correction, and it is welcome anyway. If the disagreement is about interpretation rather than fact, say so — the grading rules are published in full precisely so that the argument can be about the rule rather than about motives.
Deliberately absent from that list: a promised turnaround time. Committing to a number we cannot staff would be a nicer sentence and a worse policy. Corrections that affect safety or dosing are handled first.