How we review content

Our editorial principles

• Evidence first: guidance follows the best available clinical evidence, not folklore or trends. Where the evidence is mixed or thin, we say so.
• Vendor-neutral: Izana never sells or pushes a treatment cycle. We help you understand your options so you can ask your own clinic better questions.
• Plain language: we decode the jargon (protocols, embryo grades, semen reports) into plain words, without dumbing the science down.
• Honest about limits: we age-stratify success numbers, separate per-cycle from cumulative odds, and reassure where the honest answer is genuinely reassuring.

Who reviews Izana

Izana is built with practising fertility specialists and a clinical dietician, not written by a marketing team alone. Our clinical advisors review the science behind the product and the claims on this site. You can see each advisor, their role, and their credentials on our clinical advisors page.

The doctors review the reproductive-medicine and embryology science. Our clinical dietician is the lead reviewer for every nutrition plan. We only publish a credential when we can source it; where an advisor's details are still being confirmed, we name their role without asserting unverified qualifications.

How a nutrition plan is reviewed

Every personalised nutrition plan is checked by a clinical dietician before it reaches a couple. The plan is matched to your stage of treatment and your clinic's protocol, then reviewed for safety and practicality. The dietician approval step is a hard gate: no plan is shown to you until a human reviewer has signed off on it.

How we write and source articles

Journal articles are drafted to answer the real questions couples type mid-treatment, then edited against a fixed standard before publishing.

• Answer first: each article opens with a direct, plain answer, then expands into the detail and the nuance.
• Primary sources only: claims are cited to primary sources (for example SART, HFEA, ESHRE, NEJM, Cochrane, WHO, and peer-reviewed journals). We do not cite a competitor clinic's blog as evidence.
• Numbers in context: success statistics are age-stratified and labelled per-cycle or cumulative, so a number is never quoted in a misleading way.
• Reviewed, not just generated: drafting may be assisted by AI, but every published health article is governed by our editorial standard and carries a named reviewer. AI never has the final say.

Medically reviewed by, and when

Every health page and journal article shows who reviewed it and the date it was last reviewed, both visibly on the page and in the page's structured data. The same reviewer information powers the 'medically reviewed by' byline you see on articles. If a page makes a clinical claim, you should always be able to see the human behind it.

Corrections and freshness

Fertility science moves, so cornerstone pages are revisited on a regular cadence and carry a last-reviewed date. If you believe something is inaccurate or out of date, email hello@izana.ai with the page and the issue. We take corrections on health content seriously and will update or remove anything we cannot stand behind.

What Izana is not

Izana supports you in the months between clinic visits. It does not diagnose, it does not change your protocol, and it does not replace your clinic or your doctor. Nothing in Izana is a substitute for personalised medical advice from your treating team. Always follow your clinic's instructions, and contact them directly with any medical concern.

Questions about our content

For anything about how we research, write, or review content, email hello@izana.ai.