Home > Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

TAP Peer Review 
All original content on TAP Integrative undergoes a peer review process to ensure that the content is reliable and consistent with licensed professionals’ practice of integrative medicine. TAP content meets the requirements of various continuing education accreditors such as the State of Oregon naturopathic CE accreditation and the University of Bridgeport Health Sciences Postgraduate Education accreditation.
 
The TAP content guidelines are as follows:
  1. A bio for each TAP Expert is available on the site.
  2. All Experts’ disclosures of any potential conflicts of interest are included in their slideshow feature.
  3. All TAP Experts are licensed or certified professionals in their field and are active practitioners.
  4. Content pieces include a summary of the key objectives and main conclusions.
  5. When a research study is abstracted, the study design and methodologies are described.
  6. Information contains applicable references.
  7. Case studies are cited as such.
  8. All information is devoid of branded information, advertisement or linkages to any and especially related commercial products or entities.
  9. All content features are consistently formatted. 
Qualifications of a TAP Peer Reviewer:
  1. A currently licensed healthcare professional in good standing.
  2. A clinician in current practice.
  3. A professional member in good standing.
  4. Able to review the materials without bias or interfering commercial interest.
  5. Provides a current CV, which is held on file by TAP.
  6. Meets the approval of TAP Executive Director.
Guidelines for the TAP Peer Reviewing process:
  1. Ensure that the information meets the TAP content guidelines as noted above.
  2. The information being presented is not false or misleading.
  3. The reviewer insures that all stated indications, clinical assessments and therapeutic strategies are consistent with standard of medical and integrative practice and that there is reasonable substantiation to support the stated analysis and outcomes.
  4. The information being presented is a balanced view of available scientific information or is stated as representative of the opinion and clinical experience of the expert
    • In the latter case, the opinion must still be consistent with standard medical and integrative practice.
  5. Evidence-informed clinical applications are substantiated with human clinical trials.
  6. Animal and in-vitro research is applicable to understanding mechanisms of action.
  7. Known adverse events associated with documented strategies are fully disclosed.