WE DO NOT DECIDE WHAT WE WANT THE ANSWER TO BE AND THEN LOOK FOR A SOURCE THAT AGREES WITH US. We define the question, find and appraise relevant evidence, write only what the evidence can support, and update material when important evidence changes.
What Eights and Arrows is — and is not
Eights and Arrows Pathways CIC is a community-interest company, not NICE, the NHS, a medical regulator, a university or a clinical service. Our process borrows good transparency principles from established evidence-development practice; it does not give our pages the authority of a clinical guideline.
Evidence hierarchy
- Authoritative UK guidance within its relevant scope: NHS, NICE, government, MHRA, ICO and similar bodies.
- Professional consensus / authoritative sport guidance such as appropriate IOC consensus work or UKAD.
- Peer-reviewed research, with preference for designs suited to the question and appropriate critical appraisal.
- Specialist organisations for practical implementation and context.
- Eights and Arrows programme evidence or properly governed original research.
- Lived experience, explicitly labelled as lived experience rather than clinical proof.
Claim wording follows evidence strength
We use wording such as “guidance recommends”, “evidence supports”, “evidence suggests”, “some studies report”, “evidence is mixed” or “we have not identified reliable evidence supporting this claim”. We avoid turning an association into a cause or a limited study into a universal rule.
Source control
Important claims should be traceable to their original source. A press article, social-media screenshot, AI summary or company blog can help identify a question, but it does not replace checking the underlying evidence.
AI
AI can assist drafting and evidence discovery. AI-generated text is not a clinical source. Every material factual health claim must be checked against a real, retrievable source, and invented or unverifiable references must be removed.
When sources disagree
We describe the disagreement, compare relevance and quality, and use MIXED / UNCERTAIN where that is the most accurate conclusion. We do not manufacture false balance when one side is much more strongly supported.
Review and corrections
Health resources should receive at least annual formal review, plus earlier review when major guidance, regulation or safety information changes. Material errors should be corrected and significant corrections made visible. A potentially unsafe page may be temporarily withdrawn while it is reviewed.
Commercial independence
Sponsorship does not change an evidence label. A partner cannot buy a medical endorsement, force unsupported wording or prevent Eights and Arrows correcting or withdrawing material.
Publication gateway
DRAFT → EVIDENCE CHECKED → SPECIALIST/LIVED-EXPERIENCE REVIEW WHERE REQUIRED → SAFEGUARDING/DATA/LEGAL CHECK → ACCESSIBILITY CHECK → APPROVAL READY → EXPLICIT PUBLICATION APPROVAL.
Evidence box template
Resource: WC-XX
Version: X.X
Evidence checked: DD/MM/YYYY
Review due: DD/MM/YYYY or earlier if guidance changes
Information type: General information / Practical sport guidance / Lived experience / Clinical guidance signposting
Sources: Key sources plus full evidence record
IF WE CANNOT SUPPORT A CLAIM PROPERLY, WE DO NOT PRESENT IT AS FACT.