An earlier thread included an unsupported assurance. What should an editorial correction contain?
Discussion record: PHARMACY-18473.
Identify the specific statement, explain the evidence gap and link authoritative information where available. Preserve a dated correction and avoid substituting a different unverified assurance.
Clarification for “A dated correction to a source discussion”: the point beginning “Identify the specific statement, explain the evidence gap and…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
Method note for “A dated correction to a source discussion”: use “Identify the specific statement, explain the evidence gap and…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.