Apply to contribute
Tell us who you are, how you'd like to contribute, and where we can verify your credentials. There's no charge, and applying doesn't guarantee selection.
How it works
We read every application, verify credentials, and reply by email. If it's a fit, we'll agree on a first review or perspective in your area, set up your profile, and add your credit when your contribution is live. If it isn't a fit right now, we'll tell you honestly.
What happens after you apply
We read every application ourselves. We check that your credentials are current and that the area you want to review or comment on matches your training and experience. If it looks like a fit, we reach out to talk through a first contribution, agree on scope, and set up your profile. Most people hear back within a couple of weeks. We keep the roster small on purpose, so we'd rather move carefully than list a name we haven't verified.
What makes a strong contribution
The strongest reviewers work from primary sources, say plainly when the evidence is mixed, and stay inside the area they know well. The strongest perspectives are specific: a clear answer to a real question that a reader or another clinician would find genuinely useful. You don't need to write a whole article. A sharp, well-sourced paragraph attached to the right page is often worth more.
How we use your disclosures
We ask for financial and professional relationships so we can note or manage any conflict of interest, the same way a journal would. Disclosing something doesn't disqualify you. Hiding it would. We'd rather show a reader exactly where a contributor is coming from than pretend no one has any relationships at all.
See the program overview on the Contribute page, or read our disclosures and editorial standards.