- Audience
- Readers, laboratories, distributors and reviewers
- Region
- Global
- Level
- Editorial policy
- Reading time
- 7 min
Related topics: Editorial policy, Source verification, Scientific claims, Regulatory notes, Corrections, Conflicts of interest
Summary
- AquaVerify resources are written to help laboratories, utilities, industrial teams, distributors and partners prepare technical decisions.
- Scientific articles, regulatory notes, validation reports, technical guides and checklists are intentionally labeled as different editorial types.
- External papers are summarized as context and linked to the primary source when a DOI or official page is available.
- Product, method and compliance decisions still depend on matrix, local authority, laboratory scope, quality system and competent review.
How resources are prepared
A resource starts from a practical user question: method selection, sampling design, audit evidence, digital traceability, product selection, channel readiness or regulatory interpretation. The draft is checked against available source material, AquaVerify product scope and the intended page type before publication.
How sources are verified
AquaVerify prefers official regulations, standards pages, peer-reviewed journal records, DOI links, manufacturer-owned materials and clearly identified internal validation material. When a source cannot be verified in the repository, the page should avoid distributing the underlying file and should document the missing evidence for editorial review.
Editorial boundaries
Scientific summaries do not create product approval claims. Regulatory notes do not replace legal advice, competent-authority interpretation or accreditation review. Technical guides and checklists support preparation, but each organization remains responsible for validation, training, method scope and final use.
Corrections and updates
When an error, missing source, outdated route or rights question is detected, AquaVerify should correct the page, update the source link or remove the disputed asset. Major unresolved items are tracked in the editorial review backlog so they can be reviewed by a qualified owner.
References
- ISO/IEC 17025 testing and calibration laboratories
- EU Directive 2020/2184 on drinking water
- Spanish Royal Decree 3/2023
- Crossref DOI display guidelines
FAQ
Are AquaVerify resources peer-reviewed papers?
No. Only external studies published by journals should be treated as peer-reviewed research. AquaVerify pages are editorial summaries, guides, validation reports or operational resources unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Why are some external PDFs not hosted by AquaVerify?
Because a public PDF download should only be served when AquaVerify has ownership, permission or clear distribution evidence. Otherwise the page should link to the DOI or official source.
Who should review compliance language?
Regulatory or accreditation-sensitive language should be reviewed by the responsible technical, quality, legal or competent-authority owner before being used in routine decisions.