Reviewing edits

Last revised by Kajanan Nithiyananthan on 1 Jun 2024

Reviewing edits on Radiopaedia is paramount to ensuring that our content is relevant and of high quality.

This page is mostly useful for editors of the site but may be helpful for general users to gain an insight into what happens behind the scenes at Radiopaedia.

Whenever an edit is made to a case or article, it is recorded. Reviewing a clustered set of edits on a case or article (i.e. a changeset) allows the editorial team to ensure that the edits meet our publishing guidelines and also adhere to best-practice. This is especially true when considering any identifiable information on imaging studies.

The concept of Radiopaedia's case library is that it is composed of "personal cases that are shared publically" - in this setting, while editors should aim for adherence to the style guide, this does not have to be strictly enforced as long as the case looks professional, is readable with no spelling or grammar errors, etc. 

For articles, the style guide should be strictly followed as articles have no personal ownership.

The editor is asked to make a decision about whether the contribution is up to an appropriate standard (sideways arrow) or not (down vote). If an edit is essentially perfect then it gets a up vote. 

New cases and articles made by users who are relatively new remain unpublished until this process has taken place. 

Vote up is reserved for contributions that are near perfect; in other words, they are in line with all aspects of the style guide and demonstrate a high-quality contribution. If the case or article was unpublished, it is published. Vote up should not be used for minor edits (e.g. fixing a spelling or punctuation error).

If the editor is generally happy with the contribution, but there are some minor issues with it, such as spelling, style, etc. they choose a neutral approval. If the case or article was unpublished, it is published. They can return to review more changesets or make edits to further refine and improve the current case or article.

If the editor is concerned about the quality of the changeset and gives a down vote, the article will still be published. However, the editor has a number of options:

  • make an edit to improve the article or case

  • contact the user to raise concerns about style or content

  • if it is a case, it can be pushed back into draft mode (unpublished) for the user to refine (and this should be accompanied by an explanatory note)

  • if it is spam, marking it as such will report the user to the managing editors who will take appropriate action

'Down vote', is strictly content-based, and not on individual users, in fact, editors will 'down vote' each other and discuss why to ensure edits are to the highest standard. 

All this work helps to ensure that content remains awesome.

ADVERTISEMENT: Supporters see fewer/no ads

Updating… Please wait.

 Unable to process the form. Check for errors and try again.

 Thank you for updating your details.