Editorial
Internal view of content inventory: Where is each piece of content in the review process, which method supports it, and which quality criteria are met.
271
Total content
114
Without method reference
117
With open points
21
Safety-relevant
Workflow Board
Draft
44Are the idea, the occasion, and the target group clear?
- + 38 more
Editorial review
21Is language, structure and age-appropriateness correct?
- + 15 more
Evidence Review
22Is every statement supported by a method with a source?
- + 16 more
Safety check
23Are boundaries, warning signs, and support services correct?
- + 17 more
Approved
0All tests passed, ready for publication.
- Nothing open.
Published
161Live and in the next review cycle.
- + 155 more
Stock
ScenarioModeratePublished
Missed a 7-metre throw
Last Review: 18.6.2026 · Methods: 3
- Scientifically Accountable – Every effectiveness statement is assigned to a method from the method register.
- Sources available – At least one peer-reviewed source or professional body behind the methods.
- No unsubstantiated claims – No content with 'insufficient' evidence level is published as a recommendation.
- Boundaries set – The methods used have documented limitations.
- Clear Safety Limit – Safety-relevant content undergoes a safety review and refers to help.
- Review no older than 24 months – Content is regularly reviewed against the current evidence.
- No Diagnosis – manual editorial review
- No unrealistic promise – manual editorial review
- Appropriate, age-appropriate language – manual editorial review
- Practically applicable – manual editorial review