Conflicts of interest
In short
Coloscopy.com is independent and ad-free. It accepts no advertising, no sponsored content, no affiliate revenue, no payment for placement, and no funding from manufacturers of medications, devices, or services that are discussed on the site. Anyone contributing to a page discloses relevant interests before working on it.
What this page covers
How the site is funded, what it does and does not accept, how potential conflicts are identified, and how a reader can raise a concern about apparent bias on a particular page.
How the site is funded
The site is supported by its publisher and is not a commercial venture. There is no advertising network, no programmatic advertising, and no display advertising of any kind. There are no sponsored articles, no advertorial, and no content paid for by a third party. There are no affiliate links — links to commercial products, where they appear, generate no revenue and are present only because the product is referenced for clarity (for example, a named bowel-prep brand discussed in plain language).
The site does not accept payments for placement of links, for inclusion of particular products in comparison tables, or for the promotion of any clinic, hospital network, telehealth service, screening programme, or device. We do not accept payment to write about a topic, to omit a topic, or to slant a topic.
If our funding model changes — for instance, if the site at some future point accepts grant funding from a non-commercial source, such as a foundation or a public health agency — the change will be disclosed on this page, with the date and the nature of the funding.
Contributor conflicts of interest
Anyone who writes or edits a page on Coloscopy.com is asked, in writing, to disclose any financial relationship with a manufacturer of a medication, device, or service discussed on that page, including consulting fees, speaking fees, research funding, and equity. Anyone with such an interest does not work on that page.
Pages are not individually reviewed by clinicians. They are written from published guidelines and cited to them, and they are general education, not medical advice.
Editorial conflicts
The same disclosure expectations apply to anyone with editorial responsibility for the site. Editorial decisions are not made by anyone with a current financial interest in a manufacturer whose product is being evaluated on a page. Where a member of the editorial side of the site holds an interest that touches on a topic — for example, prior research collaboration with a guideline body — the page in question is reviewed by an external clinician who does not share that interest.
What we will not do
We will not write favourably about a product or service in exchange for any consideration. We will not allow a manufacturer to review a page for accuracy in a way that grants them effective editorial control. We will not remove or soften criticism of a product because the manufacturer has objected, except where the criticism is shown to be factually wrong, in which case the page is corrected through the ordinary corrections route.
We will not enter into linking arrangements, content syndication agreements, or co-marketing relationships with commercial entities whose products are within the scope of the site.
Standards we follow
Our approach is informed by the conflict-of-interest framework of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which sets out the categories of interest that authors should disclose, and by the ethical principles of the Health on the Net Foundation (HON) regarding transparent disclosure of funding and editorial independence. These are the standards that mainstream medical publishing applies to itself; we apply them to a patient reference because the content carries comparable weight for the people who read it.
Common worries, briefly addressed
Why mention specific brand names at all if you have no commercial relationships?
Because patients receive prescriptions and instructions that use brand names. A page that referred only to generic active ingredients would be less useful in practice. We name brands where naming them helps a reader recognise what they have been given.
Could an undisclosed interest still affect a page?
In principle, yes — every disclosure system depends on people answering honestly. The two safeguards are that disclosures are written and dated, and that any apparent bias on a particular page can be raised through editorial@coloscopy.com or corrections@coloscopy.com, which prompts the page to be rechecked against its sources.
Is the site for sale?
No. If that ever changes, the change of ownership and any change to the funding or editorial model would be disclosed on this page.