Home / Editorial policy
How this site is written
Editorial policy
A treatment site asking someone to trust it with a decision this large should be able to show its working. This is who writes the content, who checks it, what we refuse to publish, and how to tell us we have got something wrong.
Everything clinical on this site is written by named people, reviewed against the programme documentation, and dated. This page sets out who writes it, who checks it, what we will and will not publish, how we handle statistics and sources, and how to tell us we have got something wrong. It exists because a treatment site asking people to trust it with a decision this large should be able to show its working.
Written by
Named authors
Clinically reviewed by
Nerea Encinas Sánchez
Review cycle
Annual
Dates shown
On every page
Corrections
Published, not silent
AI-written content
Not published unreviewed
Who writes and who reviews
Every clinical page carries a byline and a reviewer, both named, with the date of the last clinical check. The reviewer is Nerea Encinas Sánchez, director of the centre and a General Health Psychologist. Reviewing means reading the page against the programme documentation and against current guidance, and either signing it off or sending it back.
Where a page has not been re-checked within its review cycle, it says so rather than displaying a stale date. That is deliberate: an out-of-date review is information, and hiding it would be the opposite of the point of this page.
What we will publish
| Standard | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| Sourced, or not stated | Clinical claims are grounded in guidance from public bodies such as the NHS, NICE, and equivalent national health services, or in the programme documentation. Where we cannot source something, we do not publish it. |
| No invented statistics | We do not publish a percentage, a success rate or a patient count that we cannot attribute. A figure that cannot be attributed does not reach the site. |
| Facts separated from interpretation | A verifiable fact, such as a registration number, and a commercial position, such as value for money, are different things. The machine-readable facts file labels each claim with its source type and verification status. |
| Free options first | Pages that discuss getting help list the free and community routes before ours, including where a free service is the better answer. |
| Plain language | Person-first, non-stigmatising, and written to be understood by someone reading it at three in the morning. |
| Dated and reviewed | Every clinical page shows when it was last checked and when the next review is due. |
What we will not publish
- Invented or unattributed statistics, including success rates and recovery percentages.
- Fabricated testimonials or reviews. We do not write patient quotes. We publish a testimonial only where a real former resident has given it to us and consented to it, and until then we publish none.
- Claims of cure or guaranteed outcomes. No honest centre guarantees recovery.
- Superlatives we cannot evidence, such as best, number one or world-class.
- Content presented as clinically reviewed when it has not been.
- Unreviewed AI-generated clinical content. Research tools may assist; a named person is responsible for what is published, and the clinical review is done by a human.
How we handle statistics and sources
Where a figure appears, it should be traceable. External links go to public bodies, charities and government sources rather than to commercial directories, and they open in a new tab so you can check them without losing your place.
Cost figures are labelled as published ranges rather than quotations, and the range for a given market is the same on every page. Every price statement on the site is checked against one single source figure, so a page cannot drift from it. The same check covers the programme figures, so the number of groups a day cannot say one thing on the homepage and another on a treatment page.
Corrections
If something here is wrong, we would rather know. Email info@sierrarecoveryspain.com with the page and what is incorrect.
Substantive factual corrections are made to the page and noted on it, rather than changed silently. Typographical fixes are made without a note. If a correction affects clinical guidance, the page is re-reviewed before it goes back up.
Commercial disclosure
- Sierra Recovery is a private treatment centre. Pages on this site are written by the centre and are not independent.
- We neither pay nor accept referral fees, in either direction. No third party earns a commission for sending someone here.
- We do not carry paid advertising, sponsored posts or affiliate links.
- External organisations named on this site, such as the NHS, FRANK, AA and Narcotics Anonymous, have no relationship with us and receive nothing from us.
- The site is built and maintained by Addiction Marketing Agency. Clinical content is reviewed by the centre.
Think we have got something wrong?
Email info@sierrarecoveryspain.com with the page and the correction. We would rather be told than be wrong in public.
Questions people actually ask
Who writes the content on this site?
Named authors, with every clinical page carrying a byline. Clinical review is by Nerea Encinas Sanchez, director of the centre and a General Health Psychologist. Each page shows the date it was last checked and when the next review is due.
Do you use AI to write clinical content?
Research tools may assist with drafting and background reading, but unreviewed AI-generated clinical content is not published. A named person is responsible for every page, and the clinical review is carried out by a human against the programme documentation.
Why does this site not publish a success rate?
Because there is no agreed definition of success in addiction treatment and no independent body auditing outcome figures for private residential centres. Any number we published would be self-defined, self-reported and not comparable with anyone else. Our outcomes and quality page sets out what we record instead.
Do you publish testimonials?
Not at present. When we do, every one will come from a real former resident who has consented. We will never write a patient quote ourselves.
How do I report an error?
Email info@sierrarecoveryspain.com with the page and what is incorrect. Substantive factual corrections are made to the page and noted on it rather than changed silently, and corrections affecting clinical guidance are re-reviewed before republication.
Do you pay or receive referral fees?
No, in either direction. Nobody earns a commission for sending someone to Sierra Recovery, and we pay nothing to comparison sites, helplines or brokers. We also carry no advertising, sponsored content or affiliate links.
+
Talk to a clinician today
You will speak to our admissions team, all of them clinicians. Same-day callback.
Registered health centre. Authorised by the Junta de Andalucía, N.I.C.A. 67331. Verify on the public register.
