Editorial Guidelines

• Primary data from NIH RePORTER/ExPORTER and FOA notices.
• Every article includes outbound links to official NIH resources when citing numbers or policies.
• We time-stamp “Last updated” on each guide and note data coverage years.

• Drafted from public NIH records, official guidance, or a documented researcher workflow.
• Reviewed through published desks covering data methodology, funding strategy, and career navigation.
• Reviewed for accuracy, clarity, and conflicts of interest before publication.
• Corrections are logged with date stamps; we welcome reader submissions via Contact.
• Tool pages are reviewed for clarity so data outputs include context, caveats, and practical interpretation.

• Undisclosed sponsored placements or affiliate ranking bias.
• Unverified statistics without a linked source.
• Automatically generated content published without source checking and editorial review.
• Answering official eligibility or policy questions as though this site were NIH.
• Misleading claims that suggest NIH affiliation or official endorsement.

Readers can request a correction at admin@labcat.ai. A useful request identifies the page, disputed statement, and primary source that supports the change. Confirmed factual errors are corrected in the page copy; material reviews also update the visible review date or source note.

We distinguish factual errors from interpretation. NIH award searches can vary because of reporting lag, keyword scope, supplements, and investigator-name ambiguity. When the underlying data cannot support a firm conclusion, the page should explain that limitation rather than present a ranking or trend as certain.

Advertising supports site operations but does not determine which institutions, investigators, mechanisms, or topics appear in editorial coverage. We do not sell placement in rankings or alter NIH-derived results for an advertiser. Sponsored material, if introduced, must be labeled separately from editorial guidance.