Editorial Policy

Last updated: April 2026

Scar-healing.com exists to help people understand how scars form, how skin heals, and what the current evidence says about the treatments available to them. The information here is intended to be used alongside — not in place of — guidance from a qualified clinician. This page sets out the standards that govern what we publish, how we evaluate evidence, and how we disclose the relationships behind the site.

Our mission and scope

We cover the science of scar formation, wound healing, and skin regeneration, including the full range of treatment categories: silicone-based therapies, corticosteroids, laser and energy-based devices, surgical revision, pressure therapy, microneedling, topical agents, and emerging biologics. Our scope includes hypertrophic scars, keloids, atrophic and acne scars, surgical scars, burn scars, and stretch marks (striae). We do not publish content on cosmetic concerns unrelated to scarring or skin barrier disruption.

Our audience includes patients researching their own scars, clinicians looking for plain-language references to share with patients, and journalists or researchers seeking a structured overview of the field.

How we source information

Every claim of clinical or scientific consequence on this site is traceable to one of the following:

• Peer-reviewed primary literature indexed on PubMed, with a preference for randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses where available.
• Clinical practice guidelines from recognised bodies including the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD), the British Association of Dermatologists (BAD), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV), and the International Advisory Panel on Scar Management.
• Government and institutional health resources including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
• Established dermatology and plastic surgery textbooks for foundational anatomy and wound-healing biology.

We avoid citing press releases, manufacturer marketing materials, content farms, and non-peer-reviewed preprints unless explicitly flagged as preliminary. Where a claim depends on emerging or contested evidence, we say so in plain language.

How we evaluate treatments

We grade treatment evidence using a four-tier framework that appears throughout our content and in our scar assessment tool:

• Strong evidence — supported by multiple randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, or long-standing inclusion in international clinical guidelines.
• Moderate evidence — supported by smaller controlled trials, consistent observational data, or guideline mention with caveats.
• Limited evidence — supported primarily by case series, expert consensus, or mechanistic plausibility with sparse clinical confirmation.
• Emerging evidence — early-stage research, including in vitro work, animal models, or first-in-human studies, where clinical conclusions cannot yet be drawn.

A treatment's evidence tier reflects the state of the published literature at the time of writing and is updated as new data becomes available. We do not adjust evidence tiers in response to commercial considerations.

Medical review

Our content is informed by peer-reviewed literature and current clinical guidelines, and is written with care to reflect the consensus of practising dermatologists and wound-care specialists. At present, we do not have a named medical reviewer or formal medical advisory board. We are working toward establishing both, and will update this page when those structures are in place.

In the meantime, readers should treat scar-healing.com as a science-literate reference, not a substitute for individualised medical advice. If you are making a treatment decision, consult a board-certified dermatologist or plastic surgeon.

Independence, funding, and disclosure

Scar-healing.com is operated independently as an editorial resource. It does not currently carry advertising, accept sponsored content, or participate in affiliate programmes.

In the interest of full transparency: members of the editorial team have professional connections to the broader biotech and skincare industry, including to companies developing scar treatments. These relationships are disclosed here pre-emptively rather than only at the point they become directly relevant. To prevent these connections from compromising editorial independence, we apply the following standards:

• No treatment, brand, or product receives favourable evidence grading on the basis of any commercial relationship. Evidence tiers are determined by the published literature alone.
• When we cover a treatment that is developed or marketed by a company connected to the editorial team, that connection will be disclosed in the article itself, not only on this page.
• Coverage decisions — what we write about, when, and in what depth — are made on the basis of clinical relevance and reader interest, not commercial benefit.

If a commercial relationship changes in nature (for example, if the site begins to accept sponsorship or carry advertising), this page will be updated and the change announced.

Corrections and updates

We update articles when new evidence is published, when guidelines change, or when a reader or clinician points out an error. Substantive corrections — those that change the meaning of a claim — are noted at the foot of the affected article with the date of revision. Minor edits for clarity or typography are made silently.

If you believe something on this site is inaccurate, outdated, or misleading, please reach out using the contact form on this site with the article URL and the specific claim in question. We aim to respond within five working days.

A note on what we cannot do

We cannot diagnose your scar, recommend a treatment for your specific case, or replace a consultation with a qualified clinician. Photographs, descriptions, and treatment histories shared with us cannot be assessed clinically and will not receive individualised advice. Our scar assessment tool is designed to help you organise your own thinking and prepare for a clinical conversation — not to provide a diagnosis.