Our editorial standards are the foundation of everything we publish. Dog Nutrition Hub is committed to publishing accurate, trustworthy information about canine nutrition and health, and this page explains exactly how we apply our editorial standards to every article — from research to publication to ongoing correction.
Every article is researched using five established veterinary and nutritional sources. These sources form the backbone of our editorial standards and are cited directly wherever they’re used:
- American Kennel Club (AKC) — breed-specific and general nutrition guidance.
- ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center — toxicity thresholds and poisoning symptoms.
- Merck Veterinary Manual — clinical and diagnostic reference used by veterinary professionals.
- Peer-reviewed veterinary journals — such as Frontiers in Veterinary Science, for research-backed claims.
- AAFCO (Association of American Feed Control Officials) — official pet food nutritional standards.
We link to the original source at the exact point in each article where it’s used, so you can verify the information yourself instead of taking our word for it. You can see this in practice on our Toxic Foods for Dogs hub, where every toxicity claim is sourced this way.
Our Editorial Standards for Reviewing Content
Meeting our editorial standards isn’t a one-time step you can check off — it’s an ongoing process that every single article goes through, both before it’s published and after:
- Articles are researched and drafted using the five sources listed above.
- Every factual claim is cross-checked against at least one trusted source before publication.
- Content is checked against current keyword research and competitor coverage to make sure it’s genuinely comprehensive, not just long.
- Medical and health-related articles are re-reviewed at least once a year, or sooner if new veterinary guidance emerges.
Why Editorial Standards Matter for Pet Health Content
Dog nutrition and toxicity information can directly affect a dog’s health and safety. That’s why our editorial standards exist — not as a formality, but as a real commitment to accuracy. When you read an article about whether a food is safe for your dog, you’re relying on us to have gotten the details right, sometimes in the middle of a stressful situation like a possible poisoning.
We hold ourselves to these editorial standards because getting nutrition and toxicity content wrong isn’t a minor mistake — it can lead a dog owner to make the wrong decision at exactly the moment it matters most. Our sourcing and review process reflects that responsibility at every stage, from the first draft to the final published article. If you’d like to know more about who’s behind this site, visit our About Us page.
Corrections
If you spot an error or outdated information in any article, please contact us — we take accuracy seriously and will review and correct it promptly. Reports from readers are one more layer in how we uphold our editorial standards over time.
We’d rather be told about a mistake and fix it than leave inaccurate information online because no one flagged it. If you’re a veterinarian or nutrition professional and notice something that doesn’t match current clinical guidance, we especially welcome that feedback — it helps us keep our editorial standards aligned with real veterinary practice, not just published literature.
This page describes our general research and review standards. For sources specific to a topic, see the “References” section at the end of that article.
