Health information should help you understand a question and discuss appropriate care. It should not diagnose you, prescribe treatment or make a residential stay appear necessary simply because you searched for a symptom or medicine. This policy sets out the editorial principles for COGNIFUL’s website, including the distinction between general education, program information and individual clinical advice.
The purpose of our health information
COGNIFUL publishes information about mental health, substance use, residential treatment and practical decisions around care. The intended use is preparation for an informed conversation with an appropriate professional. An article can explain terms and options without deciding which option is right for a particular reader.
Content should address the actual question clearly. A medicine guide should explain the medicine and relevant review questions, rather than treating every prescription as addiction. A detox article should distinguish withdrawal management from ongoing rehab rather than suggesting that a rapid cleanse is a complete treatment.
Our Medication Guides, Insights & Guides and treatment pages have different roles. Their links should help readers move between relevant information without obscuring those differences.
Educational information is not a personal assessment
A website does not have your full history, current symptoms, medical records or examination findings. It cannot decide whether a symptom is withdrawal, a side effect, a return of an underlying condition or another health problem.
Articles should make important limits clear without replacing the useful explanation with a generic disclaimer. When a decision needs a prescriber, clinician or emergency service, the text should identify that need in context.
The NIMH help resource provides general routes to professional and urgent support. An admissions inquiry is not a substitute for an emergency assessment or a clinician who knows the person’s circumstances.
Separate clinical evidence from service availability
A guideline may describe an effective treatment without establishing that COGNIFUL provides it. An educational article can discuss a method used elsewhere, but a service page should not present it as available without confirmation.
The same applies to medical detoxification, prescribing, overnight staffing, specialist assessments and external appointments. Program claims require an identifiable operational source, not an inference from the qualifications of one member of a shared team.
Read clinical scope and suitability for the program context. A condition appearing on a website is not proof that a residence can meet every level of care associated with that diagnosis.
Use sources that support the actual statement
Clinical explanations should draw on relevant sources such as professional guidance, medicines regulators, public-health agencies and original research. A reference should support the statement next to it or the clearly identified topic, not merely make an article look well sourced.
A link to a study does not prove a benefit for every person or every setting. Study population, treatment, comparison and limitations matter. Where evidence is uncertain or guidance differs, the article should explain the uncertainty rather than presenting an attractive conclusion as settled fact.
The NHS content policy is an external example of health-information standards. Linking to it does not imply NHS endorsement, review or affiliation with COGNIFUL.
Identify authorship and clinical review accurately
A COGNIFUL byline identifies the publisher. It does not, by itself, mean that a particular clinician has reviewed the article. A named clinical reviewer should appear only when that person has reviewed the final content and the description accurately reflects their role.
Professional credentials should link to a genuine profile. A photograph, shared-team biography or mention of a clinician elsewhere on the site should not be presented as evidence that they approved a particular page.
New clinical material requires the appropriate review before publication. A page should not acquire an invented reviewer name or a review date solely to appear more authoritative. Our team information explains professional backgrounds separately from any article-specific review.
Distinguish publication, editing and medical review dates
Different dates describe different events. A publication date records when content first became public. An editing date may reflect a change to wording, links or layout. A clinical-review date should reflect a genuine review of the medical information.
Changing a page template should not imply that every clinical claim has been checked again. Equally, a relevant safety update should not be ignored because a routine review date has not arrived. The nature of the change should determine what needs reassessment.
Readers should be able to understand what a displayed date means. If a page raises a concern about whether guidance remains current, it is reasonable to ask for clarification or consult the linked original source and the professional responsible for personal care.
Medication information needs specific safeguards
Medicine guides should identify the generic name, explain relevant uses and link to product-specific or authoritative information. Brand names, formulations and licensed indications can differ between countries, so one product description should not be treated as universally applicable.
The content must distinguish physical dependence, withdrawal and addiction rather than applying a single label to every medicine. Antidepressant withdrawal, for example, should not automatically be described as an addiction requiring rehab.
NICE NG215 provides guidance on medicines associated with dependence or withdrawal. COGNIFUL’s articles do not provide personal tapering schedules, equivalent-dose tables, instructions to alter tablets or a complete interaction checker.
Make safety information useful and proportionate
Important warnings should be placed where they help the reader, not hidden after a contact form. Severe symptoms or immediate danger should direct the person toward urgent local care rather than a sales inquiry.
At the same time, the existence of a risk should not be used to frighten every person taking a medicine or living with a diagnosis. Benefits, risks and uncertainty should be explained in balance, with a clear distinction between general information and personal advice.
The medication-review checklist helps readers organize concerns for a professional conversation. It should not be described as a diagnostic instrument or a tool that automatically determines treatment eligibility.
Use language that does not reduce people to a diagnosis
Content should describe the concern without shaming the reader or implying that a difficult treatment history reflects weak character. A return to substance use, an incomplete medication change or a struggle to participate deserves an appropriate clinical response, not a moral judgment.
Search language can be acknowledged without adopting an inaccurate label. A reader looking for depression rehab may be seeking residential mental-health care; the article should explain that context rather than treating depression as addiction.
Where technical terms are necessary, explain them. Clarity means making the decision easier to understand, not removing every qualification or pretending that a complex issue has one simple answer.
Keep program facts consistent and verifiable
Capacity, fees, duration, accommodation and included services should match the approved program information. COGNIFUL’s published residential model is a private suite in a shared Mallorca residence for a maximum of four clients at any given time, with primarily individual psychotherapy.
That description should not be expanded into an unverified staffing ratio, a promise of exclusive use or a guarantee of clinical outcomes. Practical arrangements that vary by client should be identified as such and clarified in the proposal.
The admissions page, approach page and residential-life page provide the program context. Educational articles should not independently invent different inclusions.
Photographs, examples and personal stories
Images should not be described as the assigned residence, a particular clinical encounter or a real client’s experience unless that identification is accurate and appropriately authorized. Illustrative brand photography should not be used to guarantee a specific room, activity or result.
Examples can clarify a question without being presented as patient testimonials. A hypothetical planning example should not acquire a name, quotation or outcome that suggests it describes a real person.
Content must not invent success rates, guarantees, awards or comparative claims about being the best provider. A small residence may be an important feature, but capacity alone does not establish that treatment outcomes are better.
Internal links and external references have different roles
A useful internal link should answer the reader’s next question, such as moving from a medicine guide to a medication-review checklist or from a treatment page to admissions information. It should not redirect every educational question toward a booking without relevant context.
External references allow readers to inspect the source of clinical information. They should be clearly labeled and not presented as endorsements of COGNIFUL. Sources from another country should be understood in their own regulatory and healthcare context.
Where useful, pages distinguish A useful place to start from Evidence and sources. This helps separate the site’s related resources from the external evidence behind a clinical explanation.
Corrections and feedback
To raise a possible error, use the website contact options and identify the page, the statement and the concern. A precise example is easier to investigate than a general statement that the whole subject is wrong. Include an authoritative source when one is available.
Do not include extensive medical records in an editorial inquiry or a public comment. Ask for an appropriate secure route when personal clinical information needs to be shared. See privacy and website information for the site’s privacy context.
An editorial question is not a route for urgent personal advice. If the concern is about a medicine you are taking or a new symptom, contact the relevant clinician or pharmacist. Immediate danger requires local emergency support.
How to use the information in a care decision
Bring the questions that matter to you to an appropriate professional. Ask what the options are, how benefits and risks apply in your circumstances and what remains uncertain. A website should support that conversation rather than decide it in advance.
NICE shared-decision guidance describes the importance of combining evidence with the person’s priorities. Our comparison checklist is a preparation aid, not a validated tool or a provider ranking.
Reading an article or contacting admissions does not commit you to treatment. The next step should follow the clinical assessment, practical fit and your informed understanding of the proposed care.
Evidence and sources
- NHS: content policy.
- NICE NG197: shared decision making.
- NICE NG215: medicines associated with dependence or withdrawal.
- NIMH: finding professional and urgent help.
These references provide external context. They do not imply review, approval or endorsement of COGNIFUL by the organizations named.
