Editorial Policy

Last updated: 2026. This Editorial Policy describes how we research, write, review, and update the content on Aging Independence (agingindependence.com). It exists so readers can judge our work on its process, not just its conclusions.

Our Mission

Aging Independence covers the decisions that determine whether adults stay strong, sharp, and self-sufficient through every decade after 60 — and the decisions family caregivers face when independence starts to slip. Our goal is to translate the research, the clinical guidelines, and the lived experience of older adults and their families into something a reader can actually act on this week.

How We Research

Before we write an article, we collect sources from the most authoritative places we can find for the topic:

• Peer-reviewed research — PubMed, JAMA, BMJ, Lancet, NEJM, geriatric medicine journals, and clinical-trial registries.
• Government and clinical bodies — the National Institute on Aging (NIA), CDC, FDA, HHS, AHA, ACSM, AOTA, APTA, Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
• Clinical practice guidelines — from professional societies like the American Geriatrics Society, the American College of Physicians, and the World Health Organization.
• Building codes and accessibility standards — ADA, ANSI A117.1, the International Residential Code, and CAPS (Certified Aging-in-Place Specialist) curricula.
• Lived experience — conversations with older adults, family caregivers, geriatric care managers, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and home-modification specialists.

We prefer primary sources over secondary reporting. When we cite a statistic, we link or attribute it to a source we believe a reader can verify.

How We Write

Every article follows the same principles:

• Evidence-first. Claims that affect health, safety, or money are grounded in research or clinical guidelines — not opinion.
• Action-oriented. Every guide ends with concrete steps the reader can take in the next seven days. Theory without practice is wasted writing.
• Plain-spoken. We don’t use jargon when an everyday word will do. We don’t patronize older readers, and we don’t lecture caregivers.
• Specific. Where it’s helpful, we use concrete numbers — dimensions, weight ratings, costs in USD, study sample sizes — instead of vague claims.
• Balanced. When the evidence is mixed, we say so. We don’t flatten ambiguity into false certainty.

Review Process

Articles touching on health, safety, or finance are reviewed by a second writer or editor before publication. Where appropriate, we ask qualified professionals — geriatricians, physical therapists, occupational therapists, certified aging-in-place specialists, geriatric care managers, elder-law attorneys — to review specific articles in their area of expertise. Reviewers are not paid to endorse particular products, services, or conclusions.

AI Use Disclosure

We use AI tools to assist with first drafts, research summaries, copy-editing, and search-engine optimization. AI is a tool we use; it is not an author. Every published article is reviewed, revised, and fact-checked by a human editor before it goes live. The judgments, recommendations, and editorial direction are ours, not the AI’s. We do not publish content that has not been reviewed by a human.

Corrections and Updates

We periodically review and update our content to reflect new research, new clinical guidelines, new products, and new prices. The fields we cover — gerontology, geriatric medicine, assistive technology, healthcare policy, building codes — change frequently, and we try to keep up.

Editorial Independence

Our editorial decisions are independent of our revenue. Specifically:

• We do not accept payment for product placements, favorable mentions, or coverage of a particular topic.
• Advertisers (including any display-ad networks we may use) have no influence over our editorial content.
• Some links on this site may be affiliate links, meaning we earn a small commission if a reader clicks through and buys something at no additional cost to them. Affiliate relationships never determine which products we recommend.
• We do not write sponsored posts.

If we ever publish content that an outside party has paid for or substantially influenced, we will mark it clearly as sponsored, partnered, or paid content. Anything else on the site is independent editorial work.

Sources We Don’t Use

We do not cite anonymous blog posts, social-media testimonials, marketing materials disguised as research, predatory or pay-to-publish journals, or product-seller websites as our primary evidence for health or safety claims. We may reference them as examples or context, but the underlying claim has to stand on a more credible source.

Author Bylines and Expertise

Where possible, articles include the writer’s name and a brief note on their background and relevant expertise. We do not pretend our writers are doctors when they are not, and we do not invent credentials. When an article is reviewed by a clinician or specialist, we name the reviewer.

What We Don’t Do

Some things we deliberately avoid:

• Personalized medical, legal, or financial advice. We can’t see your situation. For decisions that depend on your individual circumstances, please consult a qualified professional. See our Disclaimer for more.
• Fear-based clickbait. Aging is serious, but we don’t use fear or shame to drive engagement.
• Magical thinking. If a supplement, exercise program, gadget, or therapy hasn’t demonstrated benefit in well-designed studies, we won’t pretend it has.
• Patronizing language. Adults over 60 are adults, not children. We write to them, not about them.

Changes to This Policy

We may update this Editorial Policy from time to time. The “Last updated” date at the top of this page will reflect the most recent revision. If we make a significant change to how we research or review content, we’ll note it here.