Skip to content
KOPFSACHE
← Science

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

44

Are the idea, the occasion, and the target group clear?

  • + 38 more

Editorial review

21

Is language, structure and age-appropriateness correct?

  • + 15 more

Evidence Review

22

Is every statement supported by a method with a source?

  • + 16 more

Safety check

23

Are boundaries, warning signs, and support services correct?

  • + 17 more

Approved

0

All tests passed, ready for publication.

  • Nothing open.

Published

161

Live 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
View content