Credential transparency: this is an editorial organization profile, not a physician or laboratory-director credential. Independent medical review is not claimed until a qualified, named reviewer is formally engaged.

Editorial scope

The team translates primary studies and public-health documentation into plain-language EtG resources. Its work covers source selection, study-design summaries, cutoff comparisons, result limitations, calculator logic, internal consistency, and updates.

Evidence process

  1. Identify the user question and the claim requiring support.
  2. Prefer controlled human studies, analytical validations, diagnostic-accuracy studies, and authoritative public-health definitions.
  3. Record population, specimen, method, cutoff, collection window, and limitations.
  4. Separate group-level findings from individual prediction.
  5. Link the published explanation to its primary sources and correction process.

Medical-review status

The current content has undergone an editorial evidence review, not independent clinical review. When a qualified reviewer is added, their name, credentials, professional profile, scope of review, and review date will be displayed on each applicable page.

Selected work

Blog contributors

Longer-form articles on the EtG Calculator Pro blog are bylined individually—see Dr. Frederick's contributor profile—but follow the same source hierarchy and review process documented here.

Standards and contact

Read the editorial and automation-use policy or submit a source-linked issue through the corrections process.