Contribute to shrinkiatry

What you get

We built this so that contributing is worth your time, not just ours. Every contributor receives:

• a permanent, professional profile page you can link to and cite;
• a shareable badge for your practice site, university biography, or LinkedIn;
• a running list of everything you've reviewed or contributed;
• a credit line that carries your name on the content you help shape;
• a listing on our editorial team page;
• a ready-to-share card for announcing your role.

Two ways to contribute

Peer reviewer. You review educational or clinical pages in your area for accuracy and balance before or after they publish. Your name and the date appear as a credit on the pages you review.

Expert perspective. You answer one tightly defined question on a topic you know well, and we attach your short, attributed perspective to the relevant page. It's a way to add real expertise without writing a whole article.

Who can contribute

We look for licensed clinicians (psychiatrists, psychologists, psychiatric pharmacists, therapists, advanced-practice clinicians), researchers, and educators with verifiable credentials and genuine expertise in the area they want to review or comment on. We verify credentials, and we ask for the disclosures below.

What we ask

We ask contributors to work from primary sources, to stay within their area of expertise, to disclose any relevant financial or professional relationships, and to flag conflicts of interest so we can note or manage them. Reviewer credentials, scope, and dates need to be accurate, because a credit is a real statement, not decoration.

What this is not

There's no payment, in either direction, and no guaranteed selection. Being listed is editorial recognition of a real contribution; it isn't a ranking, an award, or a medical-quality endorsement of you or your practice. The program is new and growing, so the roster starts small and honest and builds from there.

The terms you agree to

Contributing to shrinkiatry means agreeing to the standards below. They're here to protect readers, to protect you, and to keep every name on the site meaning what it says. When you apply, you're telling us you've read these terms and you agree to them.

Editorial standards

Every contribution has to meet the same bar we hold our own writing to:

• Work from primary sources. Claims about mechanisms, prevalence, diagnosis, or treatment need to hold up against current evidence, such as the DSM-5-TR, the ICD-11, APA and other specialty guidelines, Cochrane reviews, primary research indexed in PubMed, and government sources like NIMH, SAMHSA, the CDC, and the FDA. We might ask you to point us to a source for a specific claim before it publishes.
• Stay inside your own expertise. We ask you to review or comment only on topics your training and practice actually cover.
• Separate evidence from opinion. Saying "in my clinical experience" or "the evidence here is mixed" is welcome when it's accurate. A confident claim that outruns the evidence isn't.
• Protect patient privacy. No patient identifiers, no real case details, and no composite stories that could point back to a real person.
• Keep it educational, not promotional. A contribution isn't a place to promote a practice, product, service, or program, including your own.
• Disclose any AI assistance. Your contribution has to be your own work. If AI help is used in drafting at any stage, we disclose that and get your agreement before anything publishes.

Disclosures and conflicts of interest

We ask every contributor for relevant financial and professional relationships: employers, industry ties, board seats, equity, speaking fees. Disclosing something doesn't disqualify you, and we'd rather show a reader where you're coming from than pretend no one has any relationships at all. A current financial relationship with a company or product that a page discusses is different. In that case we ask you to step aside from that page rather than write or review it, because disclosure alone doesn't settle that kind of conflict.

How your name is used

If your name appears as the reviewer of a page, it means you actually read and approved the version that's published. We don't attach reviewer credits to pages a person hasn't reviewed. Every credit is a real statement about real work.

Credentials, and how we check them

Before you appear on the site, we confirm your credential and current role against an authoritative source, such as a state licensing board, the ABPN or ABMS, the NPI registry, or a university faculty page. We confirm the affiliation you list, and if we can't confirm it, we list you as independent practice instead. If a credential can't be verified, we work with you to sort it out or we don't publish. Verification isn't a background check; it confirms the specific credential and role we'll publish about you.

What you keep, and what you grant

You keep the rights to your own words. When you contribute, you give shrinkiatry permission to publish and keep your contribution on the site and to make light edits for accuracy, length, and house style, which we'll run past you when they're substantive. That permission is non-exclusive, so you're free to republish your own perspective elsewhere, and we just ask that you credit its original publication on shrinkiatry. Applying or contributing never creates an obligation on either side, and nothing about a listing can be bought or sold.

Corrections, updates, and removal

You can correct or update your contribution at any time by emailing us, and we log substantive corrections. You can also withdraw a contribution whenever you want, and we take it down from the page and from your profile within thirty days. If your credentials lapse, if a licensing action is filed, or if a new disclosure would change what a contribution means, we pause your profile, re-check the affected pages, and either restore or remove them based on what we find.

What we don't publish

• Anonymous or pseudonymous contributions. Every one carries a real name and verified credentials.
• Work credited to someone who didn't write it. The person who wrote the analysis is the contributor.
• Promotion of a practice, product, service, or program dressed up as a contribution.
• Lists that rank clinicians against each other. We don't publish those.
• Inflated or unverifiable credentials. We remove anything we can't confirm.
• Anything tied to referrals. See the note just below.

No referral arrangements

The Shrink Network, which shrinkiatry is part of, was founded by Shariq Refai, MD, MBA, who also owns shrinkMD, an independent psychiatry practice. Because of that single-owner connection, we're strict about one thing: nothing here is ever tied to referrals. Being invited to contribute, or being published, is never connected to sending or receiving patient referrals with shrinkMD, and past or promised referrals never factor into who we bring on. If shrinkMD ever contacts you about something separate, that's not connected to your work here, and it'll say so.

Shrinkiatry is part of the Shrink Network. For how we build and review content, see our editorial standards, how we build content, and disclosures.