Who writes these articles?
The Neckly Learn library is written and fact-checked by the Dalkir Studio editorial team — the same small team that builds the Neckly app. We are not clinicians. We do not have a licensed physiotherapist or physician on staff, and we do not claim medical review on any page.
Why does that matter?
Because health content routinely implies credentials it does not have. A byline reading "medically reviewed" carries a specific promise: that a licensed professional evaluated the claims. We cannot make that promise today, so we do not make it. Instead, every factual claim is traceable to a named source you can open and check yourself.
What counts as a source here?
We cite primary and institutional sources, in roughly this order of preference:
| Tier | Examples | Used for |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cochrane reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses | Effectiveness claims |
| 2 | Peer-reviewed trials with a DOI or PMID | Specific findings and figures |
| 3 | NIH, NHS, NICE, WHO, CDC | Definitions, prevalence, safety guidance |
| 4 | Cleveland Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Harvard Health, MedlinePlus | Patient-facing explanations |
| 5 | Professional bodies (APTA, ergonomics standards) | Practice recommendations |
We do not cite other blogs, content farms, supplement sellers, or AI-generated summaries. If a claim cannot be traced to a source in this table, it does not go in the article.
How do you describe evidence?
We try to be precise about how strong the evidence is, rather than hedging everything into meaninglessness or overstating it into a promise. Compare three ways of writing the same thing:
- Too vague: "Exercises may possibly help somewhat."
- Overclaiming: "Neckly fixes forward head posture."
- What we aim for: "A Cochrane review of neck-specific exercise found small-to-moderate reductions in chronic neck pain; evidence for posture correction is lower quality."
The third is definitive about the state of the evidence while promising nothing about your individual outcome.
What will you never claim?
Neckly's articles will not diagnose a condition, name a treatment for a condition, promise a specific outcome or timeline, claim to replace physiotherapy or medical care, or suggest that exercise is an alternative to seeing a clinician when symptoms warrant one.
Every article that touches symptoms carries a red-flag section: pain radiating into the arm or hand, numbness, tingling, weakness, pain following trauma, fever, or unexplained weight loss all mean see a clinician, not open an app.
How often is this updated?
Every article shows a published date and a last-updated date, and the update date only moves when the substance changes — a new source, a corrected figure, an added section. We do not bump dates cosmetically to look fresh.
We aim to revisit each article at least once a year, and sooner when a major review or guideline changes the picture.
How do I report an error?
Email [email protected] with the article URL and what you believe is wrong. If a factual claim is incorrect, we correct it and note the correction on the page. We would rather be corrected than be wrong quietly.
Is any of this written by AI?
We use AI tools for drafting and editing, the same way we use a spellchecker or a search engine. Every claim, every number and every citation in a published article has been checked by a person against the cited source. Responsibility for what is published sits with us, not with a tool.
Who pays for this?
Nobody outside Dalkir Studio. There is no sponsored content, no affiliate links, and no advertising anywhere on this site or in the app. The obvious conflict of interest is that we also sell a subscription — so treat any sentence recommending Neckly as marketing, and treat the cited sources as the part you should actually verify.