Editorial Policy

Our Standards

At Free Brain, accuracy and trust are foundational to everything we publish. We hold ourselves to these standards:

• Evidence-based — We cite peer-reviewed research and reputable academic sources. If a claim can’t be sourced, we don’t make it.
• Transparent about evidence quality — We distinguish strong evidence from mixed or emerging evidence, so you know how confident the recommendation is.
• Regularly updated — Articles display a “last updated” date and are reviewed periodically. When new evidence emerges, we revise.
• Not medical advice — We provide educational content only. We always recommend consulting qualified professionals for health concerns. Read our medical disclaimer →
• Transparent corrections — If we make an error, we correct it promptly and note the change at the bottom of the article.
• No undisclosed conflicts — If we recommend a product or tool, we disclose any affiliate relationships.

---

Who Writes Our Content

All content on Free Brain is written, reviewed, or approved by Anas Kalthoum, founder and technical director of Free Brain. He combines software engineering, editorial research, and educational tool design to produce practical, evidence-aware guidance.

Anas Kalthoum, the founder of FreeBrain, has a background in software engineering and educational technology. He has spent years reading cognitive science research and testing study systems in real technical work and self-directed learning. His role is to translate published findings into practical workflows, not to provide medical or clinical advice.

Read more about Anas Kalthoum →

---

How We Research & Write

Every article follows the same process:

1. Topic research — We identify a practical problem (e.g., “how to improve focus”) and survey the relevant peer-reviewed literature.
2. Source evaluation — We prioritize meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and well-designed experiments. We note when evidence is limited or mixed.
3. Writing — We translate findings into plain language with actionable steps. Every guide follows a consistent structure: context, evidence, technique, next steps.
4. Citation — We link to original studies and reputable sources throughout. Readers can verify any claim we make.
5. Review — Before publishing, we check factual accuracy, source quality, and clarity.

---

How We Keep Content Current

Science evolves, and our content evolves with it. Here’s how we stay current:

• Regular reviews — Published guides are reviewed on a recurring schedule and updated when new evidence changes the recommendation.
• “Last updated” dates — Every article displays when it was last reviewed, so you know how current the information is.
• Revision notes — Significant updates are noted at the bottom of the article for transparency.

---

Corrections & Feedback

We take accuracy seriously. If you spot an error, an outdated source, or have a correction to suggest, please contact us. We’ll review your feedback promptly and update the content if warranted.

Corrections are published transparently — we don’t silently edit articles. Significant changes are noted, and original claims are preserved for accountability.