Editorial & Medical Review Methodology

NextGen Biologics publishes clinical education for wound-care physicians, podiatrists, nurses, and wound-center medical directors. This page explains how that content is drafted, sourced, and reviewed.

This content is informational and not medical advice; it is not a substitute for professional diagnosis or treatment. Clinicians should apply independent clinical judgment and consult primary sources and current labeling before making care decisions.

Authorship and review

Clinical content is overseen by Josh Fathi, Founder, NextGen Biologics, and is reviewed by the NextGen Biologics clinical editorial team against cited sources before publication. Our team checks that clinical claims are supported by the citations listed and flags statements that outrun the underlying evidence.

AI-assisted drafting, human clinical review

We use AI tools to help draft and structure articles from research briefs. No article is published on AI output alone: every piece is reviewed and edited by a human against the cited literature. For medical (YMYL) content, that review specifically confirms that dosing, indications, coverage, and outcome claims match their sources.

Sourcing standards

Clinical claims are cited to primary sources: peer-reviewed literature identified by PubMed ID (PMID) or DOI.
Coverage, coding, and reimbursement statements are cited to CMS rules and official payer documentation (for example, CMS Physician Fee Schedule final rules).
Where high-quality evidence (such as a product-specific randomized controlled trial) does not exist, we say so explicitly rather than implying stronger evidence than the literature supports.

Updates and corrections

Evidence and reimbursement rules change. We revise articles as new sources appear; the “last modified” date on each article reflects its most recent substantive update. To report an error, contact us through nextgenbiologicsusa.com/contact.